United 

States 

Geological 

Survey 

Yearbook 

Fiscal Year 

1989 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Dallas L. Peck, Director 

United States Geological Survey Yearbook 

ISSN 0892-3442 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1990 

For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey 

Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 
CONTENTS 

iv Message from the Director 


1 A Unified Federal Approach to Global Change 


Research 


6 Role of the U.S. Geological Survey in 


Global Change Research 

10 People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 

26 Water Resources Investigations 

43 Geologic Investigations 

61 National Mapping Program 

69 International Activities 

85 Information Systems Activities 

92 Administrative and Facilities Support 

99 Guide to U.S. Geological Survey Information 

and Publications 

100 Budget Information 

102 U.S. Geological Survey Offices 

106 Cooperators and Other Financial Contributors 

Cover: The Earth from space. Africa and Arabia lie north of the Indian and Atlantic Oceans, 

cloud-draped from the Antarctica Ice Cap to the Equator. Photograph from Apollo 17 spacecraft 

at about 100,000 nautical miles from Earth. 

Contents iii 
Message from the Director 


0

nce again we have gone through a year of change—a 

year of major challenges. During this past fiscal year, 

devastating earthquakes in Armenia, volcanic activity 

in Hawaii and Alaska, and Hurricane Hugo's rampage along 

the Atlantic coastline reminded us all too well of the destructive effects of the forces of nature. Hardly had the old fiscal 

year ended when the Nation faced another major natural 

disaster with the "World Series" earthquake in California, the 

most costly earthquake in the United States since 1906. The 

need to understand the processes of natural disasters and to 

find ways to mitigate their effects has never been greater. 

Coupled with the need to understand the forces of nature is 

the equally compelling need for reliable scientific information 

on the water, energy, and mineral and land resources of the 

Earth. The challenges to earth scientists these days are many 

and complex. 

As we move into a new decade, the U.S. Geological Survey begins a renewed commitment to pursue the scientific 

knowledge that is needed to provide the Nation and the 

world with the tools to better understand, to predict, to mitigate, to manage, and to better cope with the environmental 

and natural resource challenges that face us. 

The new decade brings with it a renewed challenge from 

the environment. In the world at large, there is a renewed 

commitment to the environment as a whole. Political and 

social attention is focused on: What is the state of our natural 

environment? How is it changing? What effects are caused by 

human interaction? Attention is being focused on an 

integrated environment in which the natural resources—renewable and nonrenewable—and the people resources are 

seen as aspects of a whole that must work together. 

The USGS is intensely involved in research on the environment. Accurate assessments of the mineral and energy 

resources of the land and the offshore realm provide the 

Nation with more realistic expectations for the availability of 

needed resources. Detailed investigations of the quality of the 

surface- and ground-water resources—and how that quality 

may be changing—provide basic information for planning 

how water will be used and shared by multiple users. Basic 

geologic mapping of the structure of the Earth's surface provides a picture that can be used to pinpoint areas that are susceptible to landslides and other hazards, to target areas for 

likely mineral or energy exploration, to select safer sites 

for dams and reservoirs, and to build repositories for hazardous waste. By using sophisticated mapping and computer 

technology, we are able to combine land-use, geologic, hydrologic, and other information for analysis and manipulation in 

thousands of ways to provide answers for questions that we 

could not even ask a decade ago. 

The year 1990 will begin the International Decade for 

Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), a worldwide focused 

effort to reduce loss of life and economic impacts from 

earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, landslides, volcanic eruption, tsunamis, wildfires, and drought. The IDNDR has been 

endorsed by the United Nations and is being cosponsored by 

more than 150 nations. The underlying message for the 

decade is that it is only through international cooperation 

and scientific sharing that we can hope, on a global scale, to 

reduce the impacts of natural disasters and to live in a less 

hazardous world. 

The global perspective is one that is becoming increasingly important in many of our scientific endeavors. The 

entire science of global change is forcing us to widen our 

horizons, scientifically and socially, and to consider on an 

international level the impacts of our human actions and 

how we conduct our science to deal with those human 

impacts as well as with natural processes. 

In my role as Chairman of the Committee on Earth Sciences, I have become intensely involved in the work of global change research. It is an exciting—and sometimes daunting—field in which to be engaged. The challenges are many, 

including developing an understanding of the complexities 

of land, atmosphere, biosphere, and hydrosphere interactions and then modeling those complexities at scales that 

can be meaningful in developing policies and plans for coping with change. There can be arguments about how much 

global change has occurred. There can be arguments about 

the causes of that change, whether natural or human 

induced. But what cannot be argued, based on the scientific 

record and the research to date, is that our global environment is and will be changing. How much change and with 

what effects are two of the major questions that we as earth 

scientists are being asked to answer. 

As you will see from articles in this Yearbook, the 

USGS is integrally involved in many aspects of global 

change, from land classification studies, remote sensing, and 

river-basin studies to studies of ancient climates, glacial 

advance and retreat, and coastline changes. We are, after all, 

scientists of the Earth. 

We are excited and challenged by the tasks that lie 

before us in furthering our understanding of the global 

environment. The tasks ahead, the information that must be 

gathered, and the research that must be conducted will all 

allow the USGS to further its commitment to provide more 

and better "Earth Science in the Public Service." It is with 

great pleasure that I present to you the "U.S. Geological 

Survey Yearbook for Fiscal Year 1989." 

Dallas L. Peck 

iv 
In the coming decades, global change may well represent the most 

significant societal, environmental, and economic challenge facing this 

Nation and the world. The national goal of developing a predictive 

understanding of global change is, in its truest sense, science in the 

service of mankind. 

A Unified Federal Approach to 

Global Change Research 

By John A. Kelmelis 

Introduction 

The Earth is in a constant state of 

change. Past climates have been 

warmer—and colder—than today. 

Sea levels have risen and fallen, changing 

the shape of shorelines. The diversity of 

plant and animal life on Earth has 

changed over time. There have been 

times of drought and times of flooding. 

The face of the landscape has changed 

over millions of years, responding to 

forces that built, eroded, shifted, and 

moved the land surface. Some global 

change is the result of natural processes; 

other change is the result of human 

influence on or interaction with those 

natural processes. The important goal of 

global change research is to understand 

the natural aspects of global change, 

which aspects are caused by human activities, and, most critically, what are the 

effects of those changes on the global 

environment. Only with a sound scientific 

understanding of all the processes involved can the Nation and the world 

make informed decisions to deal with 

global change. 

To be more certain that the scientific 

issues involved in global change are being 

adequately addressed, the Committee on 

Earth Sciences (CES) was established by a 

directive of the Federal Coordinating 

Council for Science, Engineering and 

Technology (FCCSET) on March 6, 

1987. The CES was initially charged with 

reviewing Federal research in earth science, both national and international, 

and with improving the planning, coordination, and communication among those 

Federal agencies involved in earth-science 

research. The CES was then assigned the 

responsibility of establishing the needs 

and priorities for a unified approach to 

global change research. The scientific 

objectives of Federal research efforts are 

to monitor, to understand, and, ultimately, to predict global change. The 

overriding goal of the U.S. Global 

Change Research Program is to gain a 

A Unified Federal Approach to Global Change Research 1 
Sand dunes in Death Valley, 

Calif. The USGS is expanding 

its arid-regions research including remote-sensing efforts to 

monitor changes in desert 

boundaries and to study surficial processes in arid and semiarid regions that are particularly 

sensitive to climate change. 

(Photograph by Richard Frear.) 

The effects of Hurricane Hugo, 

as seen on Isle of Palms, S.C., 

underscore the need for studies 

of coastal processes to be used 

in developing predictions about 

the effects of inundation and 

accelerated erosion associated 

with both sea-level rise and 

changes in frequency and intensity of coastal storms. (Photograph by Asbury H. Sallenger, 

Jr.) 

predictive understanding of the interactive physical, geological, chemical, biological, and social processes that regulate the 

total Earth system and, hence, establish 

the scientific basis for national and international policy formulation and decisions 

relating to natural and human-induced 

changes in the global environment and 

their regional impacts. 

The CES is composed of representatives from the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, State, Transportation, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, 

Office of Management and Budget, and 

the Council on Environmental Quality. 

Other Federal agencies may participate 

by invitation of the chairman of FCCSET 

or the chairman of CES. Dallas L. Peck, 

2 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, is 

the current chairman of the CES. 

A Global Change Working Group, 

led by Robert Corell of the National Science Foundation, was formed as a subcommittee of the CES to identify and 

evaluate Federal scientific research that 

contributes to our knowledge of global 

change issues. The group identified 

weaknesses in the current understanding 

of global systems and then charged individual agencies with developing scientifically sound research projects to focus on 

those weaknesses. 

Interdisciplinary Science Elements 

Recognizing that the standard, 

single-disciplinary approach to scientific 

research would provide too narrow a 

focus for those global change issues 

which cut across two or more disciplines, 

the CES identified the following seven 

interdisciplinary science elements on 

which to build an integrated understanding of the Earth. 

Climate and Hydrologic Systems. Understanding the characteristics of the atmosphere, oceans, and land surface that in 

turn influence temperature, humidity, 

clouds, and precipitation is a high priority of global change research. These 

characteristics are extremely variable and, 

whether natural or human-induced, can 

have a profound and rapid impact on the 

habitability of many regions of the 

planet. Weaknesses in current research 

programs include sparse data for some 

regions; inadequate understanding of 

critical atmospheric, climatic, and hydrologic factors; and poor understanding of 

how energy is transferred in the atmosphere, oceans, and land. Of particular 

concern is the lack of understanding of 

cloud dynamics and their contributions to 

the climate system. 

To improve our understanding of 

the interrelation between the climate system and the hydrologic cycle, studies will 

be conducted to learn more about how 

clouds affect the solar energy that enters 

and leaves the atmosphere, how the 

oceans transfer and redistribute that 

energy, and the rates at which water and 

energy are transported among the 

atmosphere, biosphere, and land and 

ocean surfaces. Global ice balance—how: 

much ice remains stored in polar ice caps 

and glaciers—will play an important part 

in these studies, as will studies of river 

basins. The geographic interpretation of 

land-surface characteristics, particularly 

from remote-sensing data, will be a significant aspect of these studies. 

Biogeochemical Dynamics. Many constituents of the atmosphere have the potential to influence climate, alter the amount 

and type of radiation that reaches the 

Earth's surface, and affect the use of 

nutrients by the biological community. In 

addition, chemical alteration of the 

hydrosphere and soils can affect local, 

regional, and global distributions of biological communities. Carbon dioxide in 

the atmosphere can enhance "greenhouse" effects, but it can also stimulate 

plant growth. Such complex interactions 

must be studied over time to better 

understand their relative importance. 

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's) are 

greenhouse gases, but they also deplete 

ozone over the Antarctic and to a lesser 

extent over the Arctic. Ozone in the 

upper atmosphere filters harmful ultraviolet rays, thus protecting the Earth's biosphere. Ozone, however, is a corrosive 

gas when breathed by living creatures at 

the Earth's surface. The complex interactions of CFC's and other chemicals in the 

atmosphere, hydrosphere, and the land 

must be studied in detail because they 

View of the calving terminus of 

Dawes Glacier, a tidewater glacier that empties into the upper part of Endicott Arm, 80 

miles southeast of Juneau, 

southeastern Alaska. Glaciers 

are one of the best indicators of 

regional and global climate 

change, because they are extremely sensitive to variations in 

mean annual temperature and 

precipitation. Glaciers can rapidly gain mass when the climate 

becomes cooler and more 

snowy, expanding in both volume and area; conversely, glaciers can quickly shrink in area 

and volume under warmer and 

less snowy climatic conditions. 

As global glacier ice volume 

changes over time, there is a 

concomitant rise or fall of sea 

level, as glaciers lose or gain 

mass. (Photograph by Donald 

Grybeck.) 

A Unified Federal Approach to Global Change Research 3 
350 

Mauna Loa 

Analyses of Gas Bubbles in Glacier Ice Cores Record 

290 

270 

1720 1760 1800 

Analyses of ice cores from 

Greenland and Antarctica (lightgray area) show that concentrations of carbon dioxide in the 

atmosphere have increased 

about 25 percent since the beginning of the Industrial Era in 

about 1760. Between 1957 

(when systematic annual measurements were begun at Mauna 

Loa, Hawaii, by C.D. Keeling) 

and 1989, atmospheric CO2 has 

increased by about 12 percent 

(dark-gray area). (Modified 

from Siegenthaler and 

Oeschger, 1987, Biospheric CO2 

emissions during the past 200 

years reconstructed by deconvolution of ice core data: Tellus, v. 

39B(1-2), p. 140-154.) 

1840 1880 1920 1960 2000 

YEAR 

can significantly affect the biosphere, of 

which mankind is a part. 

Ecological Systems and Dynamics. The 

biosphere is the aggregate of all living 

creatures that inhabit the numerous individual ecological niches in the Earth system. The response to change of individual species and complex ecological 

communities must be better understood 

in both natural and managed environments for us to be able to explain and 

predict reactions to biogeochemical 

changes, climatic variation, and other 

physical and chemical stresses. Ecological 

systems do not merely react to their environment, they alter it as well. What these 

alterations are and how fast they take 

place must be understood to ensure 

sound policies that can be used to manage the land and all that lives on it. 

Earth System History. The Earth's past 

environments can be deciphered by careful analysis of the geologic record—including fossils, ice cores, tree rings, terrestrial and marine sediments, and other 

natural archives of earth-history data. 

Reconstructions of past climates and 

atmospheric chemical compositions, when 

compared with the ecological communities that existed during those times, provide an opportunity for estimating how 

future changes in the Earth's system will 

affect modern ecological systems, both 

terrestrial and marine. Studies of the 

Earth's history also provide an opportunity to determine whether General Circulation Models (GCM's) of the climate 

provide realistic forecasts of the future. 

By running GCM's in a hindcasting 

mode, using actual data derived from the 

geologic record, rather than in a forecasting mode, we can validate their usefulness in making public-policy decisions. 

Earth system history information also 

lets us see how the earth system responded to past changes in climate; 

thus, we will better understand, for example, the historic distribution of surfaceand ground-water resources, biological 

communities, and how the current distribution may be affected by future changes 

in the earth system. 

Human Interactions. The rapidly 

growing human population is one of the 

strongest forces affecting the earth system. In the past, when populations were 

much smaller and technological sophistication was not at its present level, human 

impacts were highly localized, but people 

still caused lasting changes to the Earth's 

surface and the reduction of some living 

species to the point of extinction. Modern man has invented chemicals not 

known to nature and introduced them 

into the atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, biosphere, and the solid earth. 

Man also produces many chemicals 

found in nature. Modern technology can 

rapidly alter the Earth's surface morphology, vegetal cover, atmospheric constituents, and virtually all other facets of the 

environment. Determining which activities have positive and which have negative impacts is important. Studies of landuse practices, energy transformation, 

legal and regulatory requirements, and 

economic behavior must be conducted in 

order to understand the human impact 

on nature and what appropriate policy 

directions would be. Computer models 

that link growth and distribution of population, energy demands, changes in land 

use, and industrial productivity must 

then be developed to help decisionmakers better understand the implications of 

their policy decisions. 

Solid Earth Processes. Tectonic activity, 

in which continents are being formed, 

moved, combined, and broken up, is the 

most extreme form of solid earth change. 

This process, slow as it is in human 

terms, alters coastlines, puts gases, aerosols, heat, and fluids into the atmosphere 

and oceans, and changes the elevation of 

the Earth's crust. Erosional, transport, 

and depositional processes, which are 

occurring constantly, move vast amounts 

4 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
of materials from all parts of the Earth's 

surface. Changes in the distribution of 

permafrost alter the amount of gases 

trapped in that frozen soil and can affect 

greenhouse gas concentrations in the 

atmosphere. This is important for our 

understanding of climate change and biogeochemical dynamics. Determining what 

part of alterations in coastlines is due to 

changes in sea level caused by climate 

variability—as compared to what part is 

caused by tectonic, erosional, or humaninduced actions—has tremendous implications for coastal communities. The role 

of the midocean ridge system and volcanoes must also be better understood 

because they affect chemical contents of 

the atmosphere and the hydrosphere. In 

addition, surficial processes are, in themselves, a feedback mechanism for global 

change because they affect the dynamics 

of the atmosphere boundary layer. 

Solar Influences. The primary source 

of the Earth's energy is the Sun. It is now 

known that the Sun is a variable star; 

that is, the amount of energy it emits varies over time. Scientists believe that variations in solar energy reaching the atmosphere due to solar variation and the 

Earth's orbital dynamics played a major 

role in the largest climatic variation 

known—the waxing and waning of the 

Ice Ages. However, much more knowledge is needed to be able to identify what 

part of global climate change is due to 

"greenhouse gases" and what part is due 

to variations in the influx of solar energy. 

Models that couple the solar winds to the 

Earth's atmosphere energy balance must 

be developed. The interaction of various 

levels of the Earth's magnetosphere, ionosphere, and thermosphere must be 

defined and modeled. Various scales of 

interactions from molecular through global must be understood as they relate to 

the influx of solar radiation in various 

spectral bands. Also, how the varying 

spectral output of the Sun affects the 

atmospheric composition and the Earth's 

biosphere must be determined. 

Data Management Challenges 

Although data management is not a 

science element, its importance cannot be 

overstated. The interdisciplinary, interagency, and international aspects of the 

science elements pose unprecedented 

challenges for data management and 

information exchange. Vast amounts of 

data already exist, and much more data 

are being created as each new program 

gets underway. Effective management of 

all this data will provide a needed bridge 

between observations of global change 

and scientific understanding of those 

changes. 

Some scientists have difficulty finding out who has what data and how good 

the data are. Working among their various CES-member agencies and through 

the helpful assistance of the Interagency 

Working Group on Data Management 

for Global Change, scientists are improving access to data and devising better 

means to handle the massive computerized banks of information. By using existing facilities, NASA, NOAA, NSF, DOE, 

and DOI will continue to develop and 

expand a Master Directory for Global 

Change Data. Hundreds of global change 

data sets already have been documented 

and entered. Bilateral agreements have 

been signed between NASA and NOAA 

and between NASA and the USGS for 

the development of data systems to 

manage satellite data. 

An essential component of the overall approach to global change research is 

the careful blend of ground- and spacebased efforts that are an integral part of 

research, data gathering, and modeling 

activities. Of particular future importance 

is the agreement between the USGS and 

NASA to archive, process, and distribute 

all land-related data acquired by NASA's 

Earth Observing System (EOS), part 

of NASA's Mission to Planet Earth 

Program. 

Clearly, the challenges of global 

change research are many. Through the 

unified federal approach outlined by the 

CES, those challenges can and will be 

met in the coming years. In characterizing its fundamental rationale for developing that unified approach, the CES 

said in its first report ("Our Changing 

Planet: A U.S. Strategy for Global Change 

Research," 1989, p. 27), "In the coming 

decades, global change may well represent the most significant societal, environmental, and economic challenge facing 

this Nation and the world. The national 

goal of developing a predictive understanding of global change, is, in its truest 

sense, science in the service of mankind." 

A Unified Federal Approach to Global Change Research 5 
Role of the U.S. 

Geological Survey in 

Global Change 

Research 

By John A. Kelmelis 

The U.S. Geological Survey has been 

conducting earth-science research for 

more than 110 years. Throughout that 

time the needs for earth-science information have grown. While early activities 

supported the expansion, exploration, 

and settlement of vast sections of the 

country and subsequent research was 

basic to development of the water, mineral, and land resources of those areas, 

emphasis has gradually shifted. The traditional needs still exist. It is still important to understand the details of the wide 

variety of natural resources held and 

needed by the country, but it is also 

important to ensure that the information 

gathered and the research conducted is 

useful to policy makers and the public in 

their responsibilities for making wise use 

of our finite resources. To this end, 

greater emphasis has been placed on natural hazards, environmental issues, and 

production of scientific data and research 

for the increasingly sophisticated needs 

of the Nation that the USGS serves. 

This long history and evolutionary 

trend in earth-science research and information gathering has placed the USGS in 

a critical position as a member of the global change research community. Like 

each of the other Federal agencies doing 

focused global change research, the 

USGS fills a particular niche by conducting specialized research that reflects its 

own unique expertise. This research is 

linked to that of other organizations to 

form a network of integrated scientific 

programs and projects designed to 

observe, understand, and, ultimately, 

predict changes in the global environment. In addition, since much of what 

occurs on the global scale is caused by 

local and regional changes and will affect 

local and regional areas, much of the 

research must be conducted on those 

scales as well. 

The strategy of the USGS Global 

Change Research Program is (1) to learn 

the basic scientific principles underlying 

various earth processes, (2) to determine 

how processes based on those scientific 

principles act in the environment, and (3) 

to use that knowledge to develop information and methods to help people manage resources wisely and fulfill their role 

as informed stewards of their environment. 

USGS Global Change 

Research Program 

Building upon its strengths, the 

USGS has fashioned a research program 

that primarily emphasizes activities in the 

Committee on Earth Sciences' (CES) priority integrated science elements: Climate 

tory, 

and Hydrologic Systems, Earth System Hisand Solid Earth Processes. In addition, 

the USGS is conducting focused research 

in 

tems and Dynamics, 

Biogeochemical Dynamics, Ecological Sysand Human Interactions. 

Other USGS research programs and 

projects that are focused primarily on 

other issues also contribute to our overall 

understanding of global change in all 

of the science elements including Solar 

Influences. 

In addition, because of specialized 

experience in geographic analysis and 

spatial data management, the USGS has 

taken a leadership role in integrating 

information in many science elements to 

characterize the land processes involved 

with global change and to develop methods to save, manage, and distribute global change land data. 

Important Questions 

The USGS program is attempting to 

answer a number of important questions 

in ways that will help our Nation and the 

world make better decisions for the 

future. Some of these questions are— 

What were climates like in the past, and 

will climates on a regional and global 

scale be similar in the future? How is the 

hydrologic cycle affected by climate, and 

what are the appropriate scientific and 

societal responses to variations that might 

occur in the climate? What is the natural 

contribution of earth processes to short6 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
USGS global change research related to the Committee on Earth Sciences science elements 

Projects 	 Science elements 

Geologic Division Coastal Erosion & Inundation 	 Human Interactions 

Solid Earth Processes 

Climate of Arid Regions 	 Earth System History 

Solid Earth Processes 

Permafrost Research 	 Earth System History 

Solid Earth Processes 

Paleoclimates Research 	 Earth System History 

Biogeochemistry Research 	 Biogeochemical Dynamics 

Earth System History 

Interaction of Climate & Hydrologic Systems Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

Volcano Hazards Solid Earth Processes 

Water Resources Division Paleoclimates Research (Paleohydrology) Earth System History 

Interaction of Climate & Hydrologic Systems Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

Sensitivity of Hydrologic Systems Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

Biogeochemistry of Greenhouse Gases 	 Biogeochemical Dynamics 

National Mapping Division Land Data 	 Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

Biogeochemical Dynamics 

Ecological Systems and Dynamics 

Human Interactions 

Solid Earth Processes 

Land Characterization 	 Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

Biogeochemical Dynamics 

Ecological Systems and Dynamics 

Human Interactions 

Solid Earth Processes 

Contributing Each Division has ongoing projects that Climate and Hydrologic Systems 

(All divisions) contribute to, but are not specifically focused Biogeochemical Dynamics 

on, global change research 	 Ecological Systems and Dynamics 

Earth System History 

Human Interactions 

Solid Earth Processes 

Solar Influences 

and long-term climate changes? How are 

our coastlines changing? What portion of 

the change is caused by human activities, 

and what portion is caused by natural 

processes? How does the land surface 

respond to changes—human induced and 

natural—on local, regional, national, and 

global scales? Where will the data necessary to study global change come from, 

how will it be archived, and how will it be 

distributed? USGS global change efforts 

have been focused on conducting the 

research necessary to answer these 

questions. 

What were climates like in the past, and 

will climates on a regional and global 

scale be similar in the future? 

To answer this question, the USGS 

has expanded major existing programs in 

Paleoclimates Research, Paleohydrology 

Research, and studies in Permafrost, Climates of Arid Regions, and Biogeochemistry. The research is directed at 

establishing the rate, frequencies, and 

magnitudes of climate change through 

analyses of the geologic record (including 

terrestrial and marine cores and related 

botanical and geochemical records). This 

research provides information on the 

prehistoric natural variability of climate 

during the last thousands to millions of 

years. Emphasis is placed on creating a 

synoptic reconstruction of the Pliocene, 

about 5.2-1.6 million years ago, the last 

period when climates were significantly 

warmer than today. (See article, p. 43.) 

High resolution studies that can provide 

information on annual variability in climate are also being done of the recent 

past, and methods are being examined to 

extend these high resolution studies into 

the distant past. Some of the other topics 

to be studied include terrestrial coring, 

ice-core glaciology, paleoecology, isotopic 

analysis, desertification, marine paleoclimates, permafrost studies, and glacial 

history. 

How is the hydrologic cycle affected by 

climate, and what are the appropriate 

scientific and societal responses to variations that might occur in the climate? 

The USGS program in Interaction 

of Climate and Hydrologic Systems is 

devoted to process-oriented studies based 

on intensive field investigations. Its purpose is to improve understanding and 

prediction of how the hydrologic system 

A scanning electron photomicrograph (magnified about 

160 times) showing the 

climatically sensitive species 

Palmenella limicola, a small crustacean in the ostracodes group, 

which existed in the Pliocene 

and exists today in high 

latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. This species, other 

ostracodes, and other microfossil groups are being used to 

reconstruct Pliocene paleoclimates. 

Role of the U.S. Geological Survey in Global Change Research 7 
Plume of sulfur-rich gas from 

Redoubt Volcano, Alaska, as 

seen between explosive phases 

of this ongoing eruption. Sulfur 

aerosols, especially when they 

rise into the stratosphere, cause 

temporary global cooling and 

may complicate analysis of global warming. (Photograph by 

Chris Newhall.) 

responds to changes in atmospheric conditions and to provide a scientific basis 

for improving how those land-based 

responses can be represented in computer models that couple those landatmosphere interactions. The work 

focuses on showing how changes in the 

atmosphere result in changes in the 

water budget, energy outputs from land 

surface, gas transfers with the atmosphere, and nutrient fluxes through 

water bodies. This information in turn 

provides needed data for studies in the 

Sensitivity of Hydrologic Systems. 

These studies develop and apply mathematical models to assess the response of 

hydrologic systems to climatic variability 

and change. Specific river basins in different hydroclimatic zones are studied to 

evaluate the sensitivity of water resource 

systems to changes in atmospheric conditions. The results of these studies will 

provide improved and transferable methods for evaluating sensitivities of water 

resource systems to varying climatic conditions. River basins that are the sites of 

current and planned studies include the 

Delaware (see article, p. 31), American 

and Stanislaus in California, Carson and 

Truckee in California and Nevada, and 

Gunnison in Colorado. 

What is the natural contribution of earth 

processes to short- and long-term climate changes? 

Knowing that global climate changed 

in the past and how those changes 

affected regional and local climates, 

water resource distribution, and ecological systems is not enough. In order to 

make sound resource-management plans 

and policies, we must also understand 

why those changes took place. Analyzing 

the geologic record will help in determining this, but more specific processoriented studies must be conducted as 

well. Programs in Volcano Hazards and 

Biogeochemistry of Greenhouse Gases 

are also needed to examine the natural 

earth processes that contribute to such 

changes. These programs will provide 

the baseline from which to determine 

what changes are caused by man and 

what changes are natural. 

How are our coastlines changing? What 

portion of the change is caused by 

human activities, and what portion is 

caused by natural processes? 

The majority of the Earth's population lives in urban areas, and most urban 

areas are near the coast. Coastal communities represent an enormous investment 

in culture and commerce by humankind. 

Changes in coastal characteristics, both 

coastline and wetlands, can take place 

due to climate change or they can be 

caused by tectonic, erosional, or human 

processes. Some human activities 

designed to protect coastal areas may 

actually be harmful in the long run to 

the area being protected and to other 

areas as well. To determine what those 

effects might be, the Coastal Erosion and 

Inundation Program is examining 

selected coastal, barrier island, and lake 

shore areas. 

How does the land surface respond to 

changes — human induced and natural — 

on local, regional, national, and global 

scales? 

Land Surface and Geographic Characterization is a research program that 

cuts across five of the seven CES priority 

science elements. By using remote sensing, 

geographic information system, digital 

mapping, computer modeling, and other 

technologies, researchers in this program 

will develop techniques to analyze 

changes in numerous aspects of the 

Earth's surface and to provide the means 

to detect change and monitor the processes of activities that take place on the 

terrestrial component of the Earth's surface. Special attention is being given to 

the relation between processes at varying 

time and spatial scales, how they interrelate, and what is the best strategy for 

observation. 

Where will the data necessary to study 

global change come from, how will it be 

archived, and how will it be distributed? 

Global change research is an 

information-hungry and information8 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
producing scientific effort. Data will not 

only be needed by the research program, 

each project will also generate data. The 

data will take many forms, including 

field notes; ice, rock, sediment, and other 

cores; digital cartographic and geographic data; geophysical readings; aerial 

photographs; satellite images; biological 

samples; and others. To support this data 

explosion and to ensure the availability of 

data to other scientists, each research 

project must develop a data-management 

plan that links with systems that have 

been developed or are being developed. 

However, for data that are considered 

more general in nature, such as landsurface data sets for large areas and satellite images, a Land Surface Data System is needed. This system, housed at 

the Earth Resources Observation System 

(EROS) Data Center of the USGS, will 

provide a means to archive, inventory, 

and distribute data sets that are responsive to research needs. 

Accomplishments 

Although the USGS global change 

research program is relatively young, 

there have been a number of accomplishments to date. Among these are the 

following: 

• A model has been developed for 

water resource managers to use in the 

Delaware River basin to help determine 

the appropriate water allocation strategy 

during varying conditions of water availability. Under current circumstances, 

drought conditions exist in the Delaware 

basin 10 percent of the time. This could 

vary substantially if a significant change 

in climate were to take place. The Delaware River basin, which supplies water 

for an estimated 20 million people, is 

subject to changes in water salinity, water 

quality and quantity, water distribution, 

and water demand due to changes in the 

climate. These physical parameters have 

been incorporated into the model along 

with certain socioeconomic variables to 

give water managers a comprehensive 

and usable model. Refinements to this 

model will be made through FY 1991. 

Other areas are being considered for 

similar studies. 

• An initial estimate has been made of 

what global climate conditions were during the Pliocene. A plan has been developed to determine an understanding of 

that climate on a broad regional level. 

Once the regional studies are complete, 

there will be sufficient data to help validate atmospheric general circulation 

models, which are used to predict future 

climates. In addition, techniques have 

been developed for accurate high-resolution studies of past climates. 

• As part of the Louisiana Barrier Erosion Study, a careful analysis of tide gage 

records and geologic framework investigations shows that the sea level has risen 

relative to the land approximately 3 to 4 

feet during the past 100 years. The 

majority of the rise is due to land subsidence and sediment compaction of the 

recently deposited sediments in the delta. 

Because these rates of sea-level rise are 

close to the maximum rates being forecast for the future due to "greenhouse 

effect," the results from the barrier 

islands and wetlands studies can be used 

in predicting possible future coastal conditions for other similar regions around 

the United States. 

• A technique has been developed to 

identify and to measure changes in the 

historic temperature of climates in permafrost areas. This will help in modeling 

the potential release of methane, a greenhouse gas, trapped in the permafrost. 

• A baseline of Antarctic glacial extent 

has been established by using satellite 

data obtained during the mid-1970's. 

This can be compared to additional synoptic views of Antarctica to help determine if the ice edge is advancing or 

retreating in response to changes in temperature and other variables in the 

Southern Hemisphere. 

• More than 400,000 deteriorating satellite images have been identified. A system is being developed at EROS Data 

Center to save these data by transferring 

them onto stable media. Also, the 

requirements for the Global Land Data 

System have been identified, and the 

design of the system is proceeding. 

• A plan has been completed for the 

long-term management of the land portion of the Earth Observing System data. 

Role of the U.S. Geological Survey in Global Change Research 9 
People and Programs of the 


U.S. Geological Survey 

Mission 

0

ur Nation faces some serious 

questions concerning changes in 

our global environment and the 

availability and use of land, water, 

energy, and mineral resources of the 

Earth. How can we ensure an adequate 

supply of critical resources in the future? 

In what ways are we irreversibly altering 

our natural environment when we use 

these resources? How has the global environment changed over geologic time, and 

what can the past tell us about the 

future? Will we have adequate supplies 

of water of good quality available for our 

national needs? How can we predict, prevent, or mitigate the effects of natural 

hazards? Responses to these and similar 

questions depend on continually increasing the knowledge about the structure, 

resources, and dynamics of the Earth. 

The effort to collect, analyze, and disseminate the scientific information necessary to answer these questions is the primary mission of the U.S. Geological 

Survey. 

The U.S. Geological Survey was 

established by an Act of Congress on 

March 3, 1879, to provide a permanent 

Federal agency to conduct the systematic 

and scientific "classification of the public 

lands, and examination of the geological 

structure, mineral resources, and products of the national domain." 

Since 1879, the research and factfinding role of the USGS has grown and 

has been modified to meet the changing 

needs of the Nation it serves. The USGS, 

however, has remained an impartial scientific and technical agency without 

developmental or regulatory responsibilities. 

Today's programs serve a diversity 

of needs and users. The current mission 

of the USGS is to provide geologic, topographic, and hydrologic information that 

contributes to the wise management of 

the Nation's natural resources and that 

promotes the safety and well-being of the 

public. This information is provided to 

the public in many forms—including 

reports, maps, and data bases that provide descriptions and analyses of the 

water, energy, and mineral resources, the 

land surface, the underlying geologic 

structure, and the dynamic processes of 

the Earth. 4a**48.0********440 *I" 

As the Nation's largest earth-science 

research agency, the USGS maintains a 

long tradition of providing accurate and 

impartial information to all, which 

underscores its continued dedication to 

"Earth Science in the Public Service." 

Organization and 

Budget 

The USGS is headquartered in Reston, Va., near Washington, D.C. Its 

scientific programs are administered 

through the Geologic, Water Resources, 

and National Mapping Divisions, supported by the Administrative and Information Systems Divisions. The USGS 

conducts its research and investigations 

through an extensive organization of 

regional and field offices located 

throughout the 50 States, Puerto Rico, 

and the Territory of Guam. The USGS 

conducts a large share of its research and 

investigations through cooperative agreements with more than 1,000 other Federal, State, and local agencies and the 

academic community. 

In fiscal year 1989, the USGS had 

obligational authority for $670.9 million, 

$452 million of which came from direct 

appropriations; $7.9 million from estimated receipts from map sales, and 

$210.9 million from reimbursements. 

The USGS was reimbursed for work 

performed for other Federal, State, and 

local agencies whose needs for earth10 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
science expertise complement USGS program objectives. Work for State, county, 

and municipal agencies is most often conducted on a cost-sharing basis. 

Most of the appropriations and reimbursements received by the USGS in fiscal year 1989 were distributed to geologic, hydrologic, mapping, and administrative areas of responsibility. Budget 

tables appear near the back of this book. 

Personnel 

At the end of fiscal year 1989, the 

USGS had 8,589 permanent full-time 

employees. The USGS's diversified 

earth-science research programs and services are reflected in its workforce, more 

than half of which possesses a bachelor's 

or higher level degree. Almost half of 

the USGS employees are professional 

scientists. 

Permanent employees are supported 

by other-than-full-time permanent 

employees, including many university 

students and faculty members. This relation with the academic community has 

made the expertise of many eminent 

scientists available to the USGS. Students 

have also proved valuable during times 

of increased workload, especially during 

the field season. Academic institutions 

have also provided a means of recruiting 

qualified young professionals for permanent full-time positions upon completion 

of their studies. The USGS has several 

innovative programs that provide opportunities for graduate students. Other programs promote interest in the earth sciences at historically black colleges and 

universities. (See article, p. 21.) 

Awards and Honors 

Each year, USGS employees receive 

awards and honors that range from certificates of excellence and monetary 

awards to recognition of their achievements by election to membership or 

office in professional societies. The large 

number of these awards attests to the 

high caliber of USGS personnel. Of the 

many who received awards, the USGS is 

pleased to acknowledge here those individuals who became members or officers 

in professional societies or who received 

awards from those organizations. Also 

acknowledged are those who received the 

Presidential Rank Award from the Office 

of Personnel Management and other special USGS awards. 

Service in professional societies is an 

important contribution by USGS scientists to the USGS. These societies play a 

fundamental role in disseminating knowledge as well as providing a forum in 

which to test new ideas. The USGS is 

proud of those individuals who have 

been honored by election to society presidencies or chairmanships of society committees by their professional peers. 

Awards and Honors Received by 

USGS Employees During 1989 

S.T. Algermissen, Geophysicist, Geologic 

Division, was awarded the 1989 Prize of 

the Center for Seismology in South 

America (CERESIS) for his outstanding 

contribution to seismology in South 

America over a period of years. 

Charles E. Barker, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected Vice President, Society of Luminescence Microscopy and 

Spectroscopy for 1989-90. 

Raymond M. Batson, Cartographer, Geologic Division, became the first recipient 

of a prestigious NASA award in 1989 for 

significant contributions to planetary cartographic science. The award was in recognition of his leadership in fostering a 

sustained high level of production of planimetric maps covering all major solid 

bodies of the solar system. 

Earl E. Brabb, Geologist, Geologic Division, was presented with the Distinguished Practice Award of the Engineering Geology Division of the Geological 

Society of America for distinguished public service, research, consulting, and 

administration. 

P. Robin Brett, Geologist, Geologic Division, was elected Secretary General of the 

International Union of Geological Sciences for the period 1989-92. 

William J. Campbell, Meteorologist, 

Water Resources Division, received the 

William T. Pecora Award of the Department of the Interior and NASA for his 

Percentage of Total 


Funds by Activity 


3 Facilities 

3 General 

Administration 

Geologic and 

Mineral Resource 

Surveys and 

Mapping 

32 

National Mapping, 

19 Geography and 

Surveys 

Water Resources 

43 Investigations 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 11 
Personnel, 

by Occupation 

Administrative 1655 and Clerical 

559 Cartographers 

- 213 Chemists 

928 Geologists 

266 Geophysicists 

1551 Hydrologists 

Other Scientists 410 and Engineers 

2847 Technical 

Wage Board 

outstanding scientific contributions and 

leadership in international experiments 

that have applied remote sensing methods to the study of the cryosphere (the 

cold regions of the planet). 

Alden P. Colvocoresses, Research Cartographer, National Mapping Division, 

was awarded the Alan Gordon Memorial 

Award by the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing for his 

contributions to the application of satellite remote sensing to cartography and in 

fostering the development and refinement of satellite image mapping worldwide. 

Charles G. Cunningham, Geologist, Geologic Division, was presented with the 

Japanese Government Research Award 

for Foreign Specialists. The award includes 

fieldwork for ore deposit research at the 

Osorezan geothermal system in Japan. 

G. Brent Dalrymple, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected President of the 

American Geophysical Union for the 

period 1990-92. 

Frederick J. Doyle, Scientific Advisor for 

Cartography, National Mapping Division, 

was elected to the National Academy of 

Engineering. He is the first USGS 

employee to be selected for membership 

in this organization. 

Robert L. Earhart, Geologist, was 

awarded the Exemplary Act award of the 

Department of the Interior for life-saving 

emergency medical care he rendered to a 

Venezuelan geochemist. 

George E. Ericksen, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was presented with the 1988-89 

Richard Owen Award of the University 

of Indiana as a distinguished alumnus for 

his outstanding contributions to the geological sciences and meritorious service to 

the profession. 

Kathie R. Fraser, Technical Publications 

Editor, Geologic Division, was presented 

with a 1989 Blue Pencil Award—in the 

book for technical audience category—by 

the National Association of Government 

Communicators. 

Virgil A. Frizzell, Jr., Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was selected as the Congressional Science Fellow for 1989-90 by the 

American Geophysical Union. He served 

as a consultant to Congressman Norman 

Y. Mineta who represents California's 

13th district. 

Warren B. Hamilton, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected to the National 

Academy of Sciences in recognition of his 

outstanding contributions in advancing 

the science of geology. He also was 

awarded the Penrose Medal, the highest 

award given by the Geological Society of 

America in honor of his eminent 

research in geology. 

Thomas L. Holzer, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected Chairman of the 

Engineering Geology Division of the 

Geological Society of America for 

1988-89. 

Carolyn S. Hulett, Publications Graphic 

Specialist, Geologic Division, was 

presented with a 1989 Blue Pencil 

Award—in the book for technical audience category—by the National Association of Government Communicators. 

Marshall E. Jennings, Hydrologist, 

Water Resources Division, was named 

1989 Engineer of the Year for the U.S. 

Geological Survey, Department of the 

Interior, by the National Society of Professional Engineers. 

Jean S. Kane, Chemist, Geologic Division, 

received the 1989 Outstanding Member 

award of the Baltimore-Washington 

Section of the Society for Applied 

Spectroscopy. 

Susan Werner Kieffer, Geologist, Geologic Division, was awarded the Spendiarov Prize by the U.S.S.R. Academy of 

Sciences at the 28th International Geological Congress (IGC). This was the 

most prestigious award given at the IGC 

in Washington, D.C., July, 1989, and 

saluted her contributions to our knowledge of the Earth and the planets and 

her prolific research in fields ranging 

from volcanology and planetology to 

thermodynamics and river hydraulics. 

Baerbel K. Lucchitta, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected Second Vice Chairman for 1989-90 of the Planetary Geology Division of the Geological Society of 

America. 

Richard F. Madole, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected Second Vice Chairman for 1988-89 of the Quaternary 

Geology and Geomorphology Division of 

the Geological Society of America. 

Harold Masursky, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, received the National Air and 

Space Museum Trophy from the Smithsonian Institution, presented for outstanding achievements in air and space 

12 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
technology and for his exceptional personal contributions in lunar and planetary science. 

Gerald Meyer and C.L. McGuinness 

(posthumously), Hydrologists, Water 

Resources Division, each received the 

Distinguished Service in Hydrogeology 

Award from the Hydrogeology Division 

of the Geological Society of America. 

Douglas J. Nichols, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was presented the 1989 Unocal 

Best Geological Applications award by 

the American Association of Stratigraphic 

Palynologists for his paper on the 

Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary in the 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming and 

Montana. 

William H. Orem, Chemist, Geologic 

Division, was elected Secretary of the 

Geochemistry Division of the American 

Chemical Society for the period 1988-91. 

Roger L. Payne, Geographer, National 

Mapping Division, was elected President 

of the American Name Society for 

1989-90. 

Joseph S. Rosenshein, Hydrologist, 

Water Resources Division, was elected 

Chairman of the Hydrogeology Division 

of the Geological Society of America. 

James C. Savage, Geophysicist, Geologic 

Division, was awarded the Charles A. 

Whitten Medal by the American Geophysical Union for his outstanding 

research in the form and dynamics of the 

Earth and planets. 

Christopher J. Schenk, Geologist, Geologic Division, was elected President, 

Rocky Mountain Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists 

for 1989-90. 

Wayne C. Shanks, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was named the Thayer Lindsley 

Visiting Lecturer for the period 1989-90 

by the Society of Economic Geologists, in 

recognition of his major contributions on 

the genesis and character of sea-floor 

minerals. 

Eugene M. Shoemaker, Geologist, Geologic Division, and his wife Carolyn, a 

USGS volunteer, were awarded the Rittenhouse Medal by the Rittenhouse 

Astronomical Society in recognition of 

their outstanding contributions to the 

science of astronomy. 

Charles W. Spencer, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was elected to a 4-year term 

(1989-93) as a member of the Rocky 

Mountain Association of Geologists Foundation. This three-person Board of 

Directors awards scholarships, funds 

selected publications, and provides 

awards for outstanding students. 

Nancy K. Tubbs, Cartographer, National 

Mapping Division, was elected President, 

Rocky Mountain Region, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote 

Sensing for 1989. 

David J. Varnes, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was presented the Hans Cloos 

Medal, the highest award of the International Association of Engineering Geology (IAEG), at the 28th IGC, in honor of 

his contributions to the science of engineering geology and for his service to the 

profession and IAEG. 

Robert E. Wallace, Geologist, Geologic 

Division, was awarded the Medal of the 

Seismological Society of America in recognition of his outstanding contributions 

to the fields of seismology and earthquake engineering. 

Donald E. Wilhelms, retired Geologist 

and USGS volunteer, Geologic Division, 

was presented the 1989 G.K. Gilbert 

Award of the Planetary Geology Division 

of the Geological Society of America, in 

recognition of outstanding contributions 

to the solution of fundamental problems 

in planetary research. 

Presidential Rank Awards 

Presidential Rank Awards are presented annually by the Office of Personnel Management to career members of 

the prestigious Senior Executive Service 

for exceptional service at an executive 

level over an extended period of time. 

Presidential Rank Awards, the highest 

civilian honor awarded to Federal executives, are given at two levels: Distinguished ($20,000 award) and Meritorious 

($10,000 award). In 1989, President 

George Bush recognized the following 

USGS executives with the rank of Meritorious Executive: 

Benjamin A. Morgan III, Chief Geologist, Geologic Division, for his leadership 

in guiding the scientific programs of the 

Geologic Division through a period of 

transition and essentially level funding, 

while providing a framework for a vigorous earth science research program for 

the next decade. 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 13 
Roy R. Mullen, Associate Chief, National 

Mapping Division, for his work as principal architect of the Mark II program, 

which is designed to carry the national 

mapping program into the next century 

by implementing automated procedures 

and the science of digital cartography 

within the USGS and the Department of 

the Interior. 

Merle E. Southern, Chief, Rocky Mountain Mapping Center of the National 

Mapping Division, for his successful integration of research activities into the 

production process and for his accomplishments in establishing a central 

distribution center for the storage and 

dissemination of the thousands of USGS 

book, map, and digital cartographic 

products. 

John Wesley Powell Awards 

Each year the USGS presents the 

John Wesley Powell Award to persons or 

groups outside the Federal Government 

for voluntary actions that result in significant gains or improvements in the efforts 

of the USGS to provide earth science in 

the public service. 

Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan presented the 1989 John Wesley Powell 

Awards at the USGS National Center in 

Reston, Va., on the 110th anniversary of 

the USGS, March 3, 1989. Recipients of 

these awards, named for the second 

director of the USGS, were Duane M. 

Hamann and M. Gordon Wolman. 

Duane M. Hamann, a teacher at the 

Parkfield, Calif., elementary school, provided invaluable assistance to the USGS 

in describing and explaining to the local 

community the Parkfield Earthquake 

Prediction experiment being conducted 

there. In addition, his willingness to integrate USGS research activities into the 

school curriculum resulted in national 

and international media coverage that 

provided public education about USGS 

activities. 

M. Gordon (Reds) Wolman, Chairman of 

the Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering of Johns Hopkins 

University, has served as a trusted and 

valued advisor to the Directors and division chiefs of the USGS for over two 

decades and has helped to strengthen 

the technical content of many USGS 

programs. In addition, he has trained an 

impressive list of young scientists, a number of whom now serve in significant 

positions within the USGS. 

Outstanding Federal Employees 

with Disabilities-1989 

William L. Rambo, Geologist with the 

Geologic Division in Menlo Park, Calif., 

was one of 12 Federal employees Governmentwide honored at the Twenty-first 

Annual Presidential Awards Ceremony 

for Outstanding Federal Employees with 

Disabilities. This ceremony focuses attention on the job capabilities of federal 

employees with disabilities, highlighting 

their accomplishments and increasing 

public awareness of their valuable contributions. 

Mr. Rambo, whose career as a field 

geologist was cut short by an on-the-job 

accident which left him confined to a 

wheelchair, was cited for his major impact on the USGS public outreach program in California, where he has been 

active in fielding questions from the public; in organizing and chairing the local 

Earth Science Information Committee; 

and his instrumental role in public outreach activities at the Menlo Park 

regional center. 

Mr. Rambo joined Amy W. Meade 

and R. Michael Hathaway at special ceremonies at the USGS National Center 

recognizing Ms. Meade and Mr. Hathaway as USGS Outstanding Federal 

Employees with Disabilities for 1989. Ms. 

Meade, who had planned a career in 

architectural design, lost her sight and 

subsequently came to work for the USGS, 

where, with the help of an Artic Vision 

Speech Synthesizer, she has begun a 

promising new career as a computer 

assistant. Mr. Hathaway, confined to a 

wheelchair, was cited for his exceptional 

contributions to the development of computer technology within the USGS. 

14 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Program 

Descriptions 

Geologic Division 

Organization 

The headquarters office of the Geologic Division is located in Reston, Va., 

and consists of the Office of the Chief 

Geologist and six subordinate offices: 

Earthquakes, Volcanoes, and Engineering; Regional Geology; Mineral Resources; Energy and Marine Geology; 

International Geology; and Scientific 

Publications. Assistant Chief Geologists 

in the Eastern, Central, and Western 

Regions act for the Chief Geologist 

in carrying out general objectives, policies, and procedures for the Division. 

Project operations are conducted by personnel located principally in regional centers at Reston, Va.; Denver, Colo.; and 

Menlo Park, Calif.; and at field centers 

in Flagstaff, Ariz.; Anchorage, Alaska; 

Woods Hole, Mass.; Tucson, Ariz.; Reno, 

Nev.; and Spokane, Wash. 

Geologic Hazards Surveys 

The Earthquake Hazards Reduction 

Program conducts a national research 

effort to reduce hazards and risks from 

future earthquakes in the United States. 

Specific tasks include evaluation of earthquake potential for seismically active 

areas of the United States and operation 

of global seismic networks. 

The Volcano Hazards Program conducts research on volcanic processes to 

help reduce the loss of life, property, and 

natural resources that can result from 

volcanic eruptions and related hydrologic 

events. The Hawaiian Volcano Observatory on the Island of Hawaii and the Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver, 

Wash., are the principal field research 

centers for this program. The Alaska 

Volcano Observatory, a cooperative 

effort with State and academic organizations, is located in Anchorage. 

The Landslide Hazards Program 

emphasizes field and laboratory research 

into the active earth processes that result 

in ground failures such as landslides, 

mudflows, and debris flows. 

Geologic Framework and 

Processes 

The National Geologic Mapping Program conducts basic geologic research to 

acquire fundamental data on the Nation's 

geologic structure and the environmental 

and dynamic processes that have shaped 

it. Geologic mapping, geophysical research on the properties of Earth materials, age determinations of rocks, and modernization of mapping techniques are the 

main components of the program. 

The Deep Continental Studies Program conducts research to obtain information on the composition, structure, 

formation, and evolution of the middle 

and lower crust and upper mantle of 

the Earth. 

The Geomagnetism Program measures and interprets changes in the 

strength and direction of the Earth's 

magnetic field. Eleven geomagnetic 

observatories provide data for continually updating global navigational charts 

and maps produced by various Federal 

agencies. 

The Climate Change Program conducts research on the natural variability 

of past climate, on the extent of human 

influence on natural patterns of change, 

and on the magnitude of climate change 

demonstrated in the geologic record in 

support of Federal global change 

research efforts. 

The Coastal Erosion Program provides geologic information on the nature, 

extent, and cause of coastal erosion, 

which is used by various Federal and 

State agencies to mitigate coastal retreat 

and land loss. 

Offshore Geologic Surveys 

The Offshore Geologic Framework 

Program conducts scientific investigations 

to acquire an understanding of basic geologic and geophysical characteristics of 

the continental margins, adjacent slope 

and deep-ocean areas, and the U.S. 

Personnel, by Division 

Directors Office 

and 

Administrative 

Division 

520 

2276 Geologic Division 

Information 

Systems Division 

National Mapping 1782 Division 

Water Resources 3867 Division 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 15 
Exclusive Economic Zone. Results of 

these studies and analysis of new information are essential for energy and mineral resource evaluation and assessment 

of these areas. 

Mineral Resource Surveys 

The National Mineral Resource 

Assessment Program provides comprehensive scientific surveys to identify significant new targets for industry exploration in the conterminous United States 

and Alaska and also provides mineral 

resource information for planning the 

use of public lands. 

The Strategic and Critical Minerals 

Program provides comprehensive information on domestic and world resources 

of nonfuel minerals that are essential to 

a strong national economy and defense. 

The Development of Assessment 

Techniques Program carries out basic 

and applied research on the origin and 

the geologic, geochemical, and geophysical characteristics of mineral deposit systems in order to develop concepts and 

techniques to improve the capability to 

identify and evaluate mineral resources. 

Energy Geologic Surveys 

The Evolution of Sedimentary Basins 

Program studies the tectonic framework 

and depositional, thermal, and diagenetic 

processes of sedimentary basins in the 

United States to develop data essential to 

the successful exploration for and evaluation of mineral and energy resources. 

The Coal Investigations Program 

conducts geologic, geophysical, and geochemical research to develop scientifically 

based assessments of the quality, quantity, and availability of the Nation's coal 

resources. 

The Oil and Gas Investigations Program supports basic and applied research 

on the generation, migration, and entrapment of petroleum and natural gas. 

The Oil Shale Investigations Program conducts research to assess the 

Nation's oil shale resources, including 

investigation of the structure and chemistry of oil shale deposits and identification 

of oil shale deposits suitable for exploitation under current environmental and 

technological constraints. 

The Uranium/Thorium Investigations Program conducts basic research to 

determine the nature and distribution of 

uranium and thorium resources, including newly forming uranium deposits and 

daughter products, such as radon, that 

may be health hazards. 

The Geothermal Investigations Program conducts basic research to determine the nature, distribution, and magnitude of the Nation's geothermal 

resources. These studies define the geologic and hydrothermal regimes of the 

various classes of geothermal resources 

and identify the crustal, geochemical, and 

hydrothermal processes that produce 

geothermal systems. 

The World Energy Resources Assessment Program provides information on 

worldwide energy resources for use by 

other agencies in the development of 

national-energy, international-trade, and 

foreign policies. 

Water Resources 

Division 

Organization 

The headquarters office of the 

Water Resources Division is located in 

Reston, Va. The Chief Hydrologist, the 

Associate Chief Hydrologist, and five 

Assistant Chief Hydrologists are responsible for the overall direction of the Division. National water-research programs 

are developed at Division headquarters 

under the direction of the Assistant Chief 

Hydrologist for Research and External 

Coordination. 

General direction of the Division's 

field programs is conducted through 

four Regional Hydrologists, located in 

Reston, Va.; Atlanta, Ga.; Denver, Colo., 

and Menlo Park, Calif. Forty-two District 

Offices conduct the water-resources 

investigations and data-collection programs of the Division in all 50 States, 

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the 

Territory of Guam. 

16 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program 

The National Water-Quality Assessment Program seeks to provide nationally 

consistent descriptions of the quality of 

the Nation's water resources over a large, 

diverse, and geographically distributed 

portion of the country; provide a baseline for evaluating future trends in water 

quality and, where possible, define trends 

in water quality over recent decades; and 

provide an understanding of the factors 

influencing water quality. This information provides the basis to forecast change 

and evaluate the likely effect on water 

quality of various proposed remedial 

actions. Initial efforts involve four 

surface-water and three ground-water 

pilot studies, with plans to have 20 study 

units in operation by the beginning of FY 

1991. 

National Water Summary 

Program 

The National Water Summary Program provides water information on a 

State-by-State and national basis to aid 

policymakers in the analysis and development of water policies, legislation, and 

management actions. Changing patterns 

in availability, quantity, quality, and use 

of water resources are summarized for 

use by Government officials, natural 

resources managers, and the general 

public. 

The principal products of the program are National Water Summary 

reports that describe hydrologic events 

and water conditions for a water year 

and provide a State-by-State overview of 

specific water-related issues. 

Hazardous Waste Hydrology 

Programs 

The USGS conducts research and 

investigations into the disposal of hazardous chemical and radioactive wastes, 

which provides information to help in 

alleviating their effects on the Nation's 

water resources. The USGS evaluates 

the existing and potential effects on 

water resources of the earth-science 

aspects in hazardous-waste disposal and 

provides baseline data on the chemical 

contamination of surface and ground 

water to assist the Department of Energy 

in developing procedures and guidelines 

for identifying suitable waste-disposal 

sites. Radioactive-waste studies are conducted in the Nuclear Waste Hydrology 

Program, the principal emphasis of 

which is a better understanding of radionuclide transport in ground-water systems. Nonradioactive wastes are the focus 

of the Toxic Substances Hydrology Program, which provides data to mitigate 

existing and potential contamination 

problems. 

Regional Aquifer Systems Analysis 

Program 

The Regional Aquifer Systems Analysis Program is a systematic study of a 

number of regional ground-water systems that represent a significant part of 

the Nation's water supply. The program 

includes assessment of dischargerecharge dynamics, hydrogeologic and 

chemical controls governing response of 

aquifer systems to stress, and development of computer simulation models. 

Acid Rain Program 

The USGS provides information 

needed to improve the scientific understanding of the occurrence and effects of 

acid rain, so that judgments can be made 

about effective measures for controlling 

or alleviating the problem. Components 

of the acid rain research and monitoring 

program include determination of the 

effects of acid deposition on lakes, 

streams, and aquifers; operation of the 

National Trends Network; and research 

into more precise methods of measurement. The program is coordinated 

through the Interagency Task Force on 

Acid Precipitation. 

Hydrologic Data Collection 

Program 

The Hydrologic Data Collection Program provides information on the quantity, quality, location, and use of the 

Nation's surface and ground water to 

support the needs of Federal, State, and 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 17 
local governments. Data collection stations are maintained at selected locations 

to provide records on streamflow, reservoir and lake storage, ground-water 

levels, and the quality of surface and 

ground water. These data form an information base that supports national and 

regional assessments of water resources. 

Federal-State Cooperative 

Program 

The Federal-State Cooperative Program, which constitutes more than 40 

percent of overall Division activity, is a 

partnership for water-resources investigations involving 50-50 cost sharing between the USGS and more than 1,000 

cooperating State or local government 

agencies. One of the program's unique 

characteristics is that the USGS performs 

most of the work on behalf of the cooperators. A variety of hydrologic data collection activities and water-resources 

investigations are included in the 

program. 

National Research Program 

Basic research in the Water Resources Division focuses on increasing understanding of the fundamental hydrologic 

processes of the Nation's ground- and 

surface-water systems. Knowledge and 

techniques derived from these efforts are 

directed at solving current problems and 

anticipating future problems. Research 

studies are concentrated in surface-water 

hydrology, geochemistry, ground-water 

hydrology, sediment transport and 

geomorphology, water chemistry, and 

ecology. 

State Water Resources Research 

Institutes Program 

The State Water Resources Research 

Institutes Program, the costs for which 

are shared by Federal and State governments, supports 54 Water Research Institutes at land-grant colleges or universities 

in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and 

Guam. Research projects at the institutes 

are carried out in all water-related fields 

including engineering and the physical, 

biological, and social sciences. 

Water Resources Research Grants 

Program 

The Water Resources Research 

Grants program supports research as 

defined in the Water Resources Research 

Act of 1964. Competitive grants are 

awarded on a dollar-for-dollar matching 

basis to qualified educational institutions, 

foundations, private firms, individuals, or 

agencies of local or State governments. 

Research is supported on waterresources-related problems of national 

interest. 

National Water Data Activities 

Coordination Program 

The Office of Water Data Coordination (OWDC) is responsible for providing 

leadership to coordinate the water-data 

acquisition and information sharing activities of all agencies of the Federal Government. The office was created as part 

of the Department of the Interior's 

implementation of Office of Management 

and Budget Circular A-67. The scope of 

the activities includes the quality, quantity 

and use of streams, lakes, reservoirs, 

estuaries, and ground water. 

Much of the program is accomplished through two major committees 

that advise the Secretary of the Interior 

on programs and plans related to the 

implementation of Circular A-67. Thirty 

Federal organizations are represented on 

the Interagency Advisory Committee on 

Water Data, and over 100 representatives 

of those organizations conduct the activities of the Committee. The second group 

is the Advisory Committee on Water 

Data for Public Use, which is composed 

of 16 major national organizations 

involved in water-related issues. This 

committee operates under the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act. 

18 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
National Mapping 

Division 

Organization 

The headquarters office of the 

National Mapping Division is located in 

Reston, Va., and is composed of five primary organizational units: Program, 

Budget and Administration; Coordination and Requirements; Production Management; Research; and Information and 

Data Services. Four mapping centers 

(Reston, Va.; Rolla, Mo.; Denver, Colo.; 

and Menlo Park, Calif.) and the Earth 

Resources Observation Systems (EROS) 

Data Center (Sioux Falls, S. Dak.) perform the operational mapping, remote 

sensing, printing, product distribution, 

and data dissemination activities. 

To serve a diversity of needs and 

users, the Division concentrates its activities in four major program areas as 

follows: 

Mapping Coordination 

The USGS annually coordinates 

requirements for maps and digital cartographic data of Federal agencies under 

authority of Office of Management and 

Budget Circular A-16. The USGS also 

coordinates requirements of State and 

local agencies for maps and map-related 

products. In the area of digital cartography, the USGS chairs both the Interior 

Digital Cartography Coordinating Committee (a departmental committee) and 

the Federal Interagency Coordinating 

Committee on Digital Cartography (a 

multiagency committee) and provides 

leadership in the use of digital spatial 

data and in the development of digital 

data exchange standards. The USGS also 

provides staff support to the U.S. Board 

on Geographic Names, an interdepartmental board that determines the choice, 

form, spelling, and application of official 

geographic place names for Federal use. 

National Map and Digital Data 

Production 

The USGS prepares various base 

maps, image map products, digital cartographic data, and selected thematic maps 

of the Nation that are used extensively 

for land planning, land and resource 

management, and recreation purposes. 

These maps and data are made available 

in conventional printed form in various 

scales, in digital form, and as reproductions of aerial photographs and satellite 

images. Digital data are available from 

the National Digital Cartographic Data 

Base as digital line graphs or digital elevation models. 

Primary topographic maps, including 

7.5-minute maps mostly at 1:24,000 

scale for almost all areas of the lower 49 

States and 15-minute maps of Alaska at 

1:63,360 scale, are especially useful 

where detailed information is needed for 

all types of land and resource management. The program involves the periodic 

inspection for data currentness and 

appropriate revision of these detailed 

maps. Other series of topographic maps 

at smaller scales are also available, such 

as the intermediate-scale maps prepared 

at 1:100,000 scale and the 1:250,000­

scale map series, which provide complete 

topographic coverage of the United 

States. These map series are widely used 

by Federal and State agencies and the 

private sector for preparing their own 

special-purpose maps and depicting their 

unique data. Other base maps are available, including 1:500,000-scale State base 

maps and smaller scale U.S. base maps. 

The land use and land cover maps, 

primarily at 1:250,000 scale and at 

1:100,000 scale in selected areas, provide 

the only systematic nationwide inventory 

of land use and land cover data. The 

USGS also prepares various specialpurpose map products, such as orthophoto quadrangle maps, image maps, 

U.S. National Park maps, and a variety of 

thematic maps. 

National Mapping Research and 

Technology 

The USGS has pioneered investigations that have led to major developments and significant changes in surveying and mapping. Mapping research 

activities, which are centered primarily 

on the geographic and cartographic 

disciplines, currently emphasize spatial 

data analysis, applications of remote 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 19 
sensing and geographic information systems, and advanced techniques for producing digital cartographic data. 

The Division has embarked on a 

major research and development plan 

(known as Mark II) to move from manual to digital production and revision of 

map products. The goals of Mark II are 

to implement the advanced cartographic 

systems and procedures required to automate map production and to provide 

data for the National Digital Cartographic Data Base. 

Information Services 

The USGS disseminates much of 

the Nation's earth-science information 

through its Earth Science Information 

Centers (ESIC), 60 ESIC/State affiliated 

offices, and the Earth Resources Observation Systems Data Center. The information is provided in many forms, from 

maps and books to computer-readable 

magnetic tapes and compact disks. About 

140,000 different maps and books and 

about 9.1 million aerial and space images 

are available for purchase. USGS maps 

are also available from more than 3,500 

authorized commercial map dealers 

nationwide. 

International Activities 

The U.S. Geological Survey has been 

involved with earth-science studies in foreign countries for nearly 50 years. 

Authorization is provided under the 

Organic Act, as revised, and the Foreign 

Assistance Act and related legislation 

when such studies are deemed by the 

Departments of the Interior and of 

State to be in the interests of the U.S. 

Government. 

Current international program 

efforts focus on technical assistance programs in developing countries and scientific cooperation and research through 

agreements with other countries as an 

extension and enhancement of the 

USGS's domestic programs. Cooperative 

research activities range from informal 

communications between scientists, 

through formal, jointly staffed projects, 

to multi-nationally staffed coordinated 

programs focused on particular problems 

or topics. 

Related activities that are integral to 

the international programs include institutional development, exchange of scientists, training of foreign nationals, and 

representation of the USGS or the U.S. 

Government in international organizations and at international conferences 

and meetings. 

Administrative 

Division 

Organization 

The headquarters office of the 

Administrative Division is located in Reston, Va. The Division is composed of five 

headquarters offices. Financial Management and Systems Management are centralized headquarters functions; Facilities 

and Management Services, Personnel, 

and Procurement and Contracts provide 

operational support at headquarters and 

at USGS field units through Regional 

Management Offices in Denver, Colo., 

and Menlo Park, Calif. The Division also 

manages the development, maintenance, 

and operation of the financial management system for the entire Department 

of the Interior through a sixth component, the Washington Administrative 

Service Center. 

The Assistant Director for Administration is the Division Chief. Under his 

leadership, the Division provides administrative direction and coordination to 

support the scientific and technical programs of the USGS. 

Information Systems 

Division 

Organization 

The Information Systems Division's 

headquarters office is in Reston, Va. The 

Division is composed of five Offices: 

Assistant Director, Computer and Corn20 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
munications Services, Customer Services, 

Field Services, and Management Services. 

Service centers in Reston, Menlo Park, 

Calif., Denver, Colo., and Flagstaff, Ariz., 

provide a complete range of services to 

users. 

The Assistant Director for Information Systems is the Division Chief. He 

chairs the USGS Information Systems 

Council, which is composed of the top 

automated data processing manager in 

each Division and in the Central and 

Western Regions. The council recommends technology-related policies to the 

Director, coordinates computer science 

research and technology, and provides 

guidelines for the sharing, acquisition, 

and use of major computer systems and 

information management programs for 

the USGS. 

Outreach 

Information 

Dissemination 

Along with its continuing commitment to meet the earth-science needs of 

the Nation, the USGS remains dedicated 

to its original mission to collect, analyze, 

interpret, publish, and disseminate earthscience information. The results of USGS 

investigations are published in its scientific reports and in its topographic, geologic, and hydrologic maps. About 

About 140,000 different 

maps and books are 

available for purchase . 

140,000 different maps and books are 

available for purchase. A series of 

general-interest publications is available 

to inform the public about USGS activities. Research results and investigations 

are also published in journals of technical 

and scientific organizations and in publications of cooperating Federal and State 

agencies. News releases, real-time information on earthquakes in the United 

States and around the world, and news 

conferences on reports and events of current interest are other important means 

by which the USGS provides earthscience information to the public. 

During fiscal year 1989, the USGS 

produced 4,451 new or revised topographic, geologic, and hydrologic maps, 

bringing the total number of maps available to 83,000. Of these, over 8 million 

copies were distributed. The number of 

reports approved for publication by 

the USGS in fiscal year 1989 was 4,649, 

with 72 percent designated for publication in professional journals and monographs outside the USGS and the 

remainder scheduled for publication by 

the USGS. In addition, over 170,000 

copies of technical reports of various classifications were distributed. Also, 1,002 

new reports were released to the USGS's 

open files making the total more than 

28,000 open-file reports available. Over 

642,000 copies of the USGS generalinterest publications were distributed to 

meet inquiries from the general public. 

Additionally, of the approximately 

9.1 million different aerial and space 

images available for sale, about 195,000 

copies are sold annually. USGS maps are 

also available from more than 3,500 

authorized commercial map dealers 

nationwide. 

Outreach — Earth 

Science for Today and 

Tomorrow 

By Maxine C. Jefferson 

The USGS has always placed great 

emphasis on promoting geoscience education, on the employment of women, 

minorities, persons having disabilities, and 

on promoting volunteer opportunities. 

During 1989, the emphasis on the earth 

sciences and education took on a particularly significant focus in view of national 

education reports that showed a continuing decline in general public awareness of 

science issues of national importance and 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 21 
a reduction in the number of students 

who are preparing for careers in engineering and science. Demographic studies also indicate that women and minorities will make up a larger percentage of 

the available workforce of the future. 

Women and minorities traditionally have 

been underrepresented in engineering 

and science. For this reason, the USGS 

sees a special challenge in encouraging 

these people to pursue an interest in the 

earth sciences. USGS efforts to increase 

the interest of minorities and women in 

engineering and science, to recruit persons having disabilities, and to involve 

the public and academic communities in 

volunteerism all have a positive impact 

on employment opportunities for these 

special emphasis groups. 

As one of the largest employers of 

earth scientists in the United States, the 

USGS sees itself as having a special 

responsibility as well as a well-grounded 

framework on which to build support for 

science educators and students. Educational initiatives and outreach efforts 

increased during fiscal year 1989 because 

of participation in career fairs, classroom 

presentations, teacher workshops, open 

houses, field courses and field trips, 

judging science fairs, visits and tours 

at USGS facilities, and distribution of 

information. 

Formally organized programs and 

ongoing activities in 1989 included student and faculty hiring programs, the 

Minority Participation in Earth Sciences 

Program, the Historically Black Colleges 

and Universities Program, a cooperative 

program with the American Geological 

Institute, and research grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts with universities in support of USGS research 

mission objectives. Personnel specialists 

and Division subject matter specialists 

attended numerous career fairs at colleges and universities nationwide to 

expose students and faculty to the nature 

and extent of scientific work at the 

USGS. The fact that more than 500 students and faculty were appointed to positions in the USGS this year clearly indicates the success of such efforts. 

Outreach to colleges and universities 

is a critical element in the effort to 

increase the employment of women and 

minorities in the field of earth science. 

However, the USGS also is devoting 

increased resources for outreach to elementary and secondary schools to 

develop an interest in earth science at 

younger ages. In fact, this year's involvement with elementary and secondary 

schools was increased, and special efforts 

at these grade levels will continue. 

In August 1989, the USGS hosted 75 

secondary science teachers at the USGS 

National Center and presented a series of 

talks and demonstrations on current 

research and operations. At the USGS 

Western Region Headquarters, the 

bureau hosted a special 2-day seminar 

for earth-science teachers in the San 

Francisco area. The seminar was 

attended by more than 110 teachers, and 

20 USGS scientists shared their expertise 

and the results of their current research. 

In September 1989, as part of the 

Department of the Interior's emphasis on 

Hispanic Heritage Month, the USGS 

served as host to the Departmentwide 

Hispanic Youth Conference, "Conferencia Juventud," that was attended by over 

450 Hispanic high school students from 

the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. 

Additionally, the USGS is actively 

involved in the Partnerships in Education 

Initiative and has adopted many schools 

nationwide. 

Continuing interchange with elementary and secondary science teachers is 

planned in an effort to assist in the 

development of new educational materials, publications, and lesson plans that 

are based on the curricula needs of 

teachers and students in grades kindergarten through 12 and to determine ways 

in which USGS scientists and teachers 

can assist one another in promoting 

earth-science education. The USGS is 

placing special emphasis on the interaction of the earth-science disciplines in 

which they are involved. This emphasis 

illustrates to the educational community 

how the scientific fields of geology, 

hydrology, cartography, geography, and 

computer science interrelate in the earthscience curricula and in the physical 

world in which we live. 

USGS emphasis on outreach to persons having disabilities has rendered successful employment results. In any given 

year, over 1 percent of the appointees 

to the USGS workforce have disabilities. 

Also, over 1 percent of the disabled 

persons appointed have disabilities that 

22 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
were targeted for special recruitment 

efforts. With a current total workforce of 

10,534 persons, 6 percent of whom are 

persons having disabilities, the USGS 

continues to be among the highest in the 

Department of the Interior in the employment of persons having disabilities. 

One major outreach effort to both 

the public community and to the academic community in particular is the 

Volunteer for Science Program that was 

established in 1986. At the end of FY 

1987, 397 volunteers had donated over 

76,754 hours that resulted in an estimated savings of $790,380 to the USGS. 

By the end of FY 1989, a total of 1,298 

volunteers had donated 294,145.50 hours 

that resulted in an estimated savings of 

more than $3,000,000. In the 2-year 

period from October 1987 to September 

1989, the number of volunteers, the 

number of hours donated, and the estimated savings have more than tripled. 

Most USGS volunteers are recruited 

through the efforts of a nationwide network of coordinators. USGS volunteers 

are from varied backgrounds and ages 

that range from senior citizens who are 

interested in providing useful services 

and being involved, to college students 

who are eager for exposure to scientific 

research and advanced technology, to 

elementary school students who are anxious to learn more about fossils and 

rocks. USGS volunteers come from all 

walks of life: the community, elementary 

and high schools, colleges and universities, professional associations, and retiree 

associations. The USGS takes special 

pride in the 44 Scientists Emeriti and in 

the 93 USGS retirees who serve as volunteers on various projects and provide 

assistance in the Visitors Center at the 

National Center. The fact that students 

and faculty from over 135 colleges and 

universities, including historically black 

colleges and universities, also participate 

in the program is another pleasing result 

of this effort. The retirees who volunteer 

in the USGS Visitors Center serve as 

docents, conducting tours, developing 

tour programs, and scheduling tour 

groups for visits. The results of this 

docent program will be used to assist in 

the development of similar programs at 

other USGS regional Centers. 

The Volunteer for Science Program 

is promoted extensively through recruitment flyers and posters, news releases, 

visits to high schools and colleges, participation in volunteer fairs, awards ceremonies, certificates of appreciation, volunteer pins, USGS retirees associations, and 

the distribution of volunteer information 

with map sales. The volunteer program is 

conducted in cooperation with Take 

Pride in America sponsored by the Department of the Interior. 

Particularly noteworthy in 1989 was 

outreach to over 900 colleges and universities having earth science, geography, 

and computer-science departments. The 

USGS provided these academic institutions with a booklet listing nationwide 

USGS volunteer/intern opportunities in 

the field of geology. Another recruitment 

and outreach tool is the Volunteer Yearbook that contains descriptions of specific 

volunteer assignments and lists the names 

of volunteers. Through these outreach 

efforts, the program has continued to 

attract persons interested in science and 

public service. Because the Volunteer for 

Science Program is of mutual benefit to 

both the USGS and the volunteer, it is 

not only a successful program but also a 

rapidly growing program. 

Reaching Out in a 

Big Way 

By Gail A. Wendt 

Menlo Park Symposium and 

Open House 

Breaking new ground in its efforts to 

reach out to a wider audience for its scientific information, the USGS hosted a 

combined symposium and open house at 

its regional headquarters in Menlo Park, 

Calif. Titled "Geohazards '88," the twoday symposium on November 17 and 18 

was followed by a day-long open house 

for the general public on Saturday, 

November 19. 

Aimed at local planners and managers who benefit from the information 

available from the USGS, the symposium 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 23 
Angela Jayko explaining local geology. (Photograph by Leslie Gordon.) 

Mark Wilcox giving tour of 

Mineral Separation Lab, building 4. (Photograph by Leslie 

Gordon.) 

highlighted research on the causes, 

effects, and prediction of geologic and 

hydrologic hazards. 

Speakers at the symposium represented the many scientific disciplines of 

the USGS and the numerous outside 

agencies with whom the USGS conducts 

cooperative research. More than 200 

public officials attended the symposium 

and heard presentations on probabilities 

for large California earthquakes, what 

happens to hillsides from landslides 

caused by earthquakes, the fate and 

effects of toxic substances in San Francisco Bay, and volcanic hazards at Mount 

Lassen. This symposium represented the 

first such concerted effort by the USGS 

to reach out to a specific audience—local 

and regional land-use and resource managers and planners—and to help them 

better understand what information and 

products were available from the USGS 

and how they could best use these earthscience tools. 

At the Saturday open house, some 

8,000 citizens, including many family 

groups, came out to see what the USGS 

is all about in Menlo Park. The Menlo 

Park facility had previously hosted an 

open house in 1985 and used that experience to bring even more exciting exhibits and presentations to the public at the 

1989 open house. 

Exhibits and presentations covered 

the full gamut of USGS research and 

investigations from satellite image mapping and geographic information systems 

to ground-water contamination and water 

use. Other research efforts including 

mineral resources, planetary geology, and 

marine geology were highlighted. Computer applications, publications, the 

USGS library, and the Menlo Park Earth 

Science Information Center—one of the 

11 public outlets for USGS information 

and map and book sales—rounded out 

the extensive program. 

In direct response to visitors at the 

open house who said that they would like 

to visit the USGS more often, the Earth 

Science Information Center (ESIC) at the 

Menlo Park office has become the first 

ESIC in the Nation to extend its hours to 

7 p.m., each Thursday, beginning January 1990. 

Reston Open House 

In the spring of 1989, in conjunction 

with National Science and Technology 

Week, sponsored by the National Science 

Foundation, the USGS hosted an open 

house at its National Center in Reston, 

Va. The 1-day event on Saturday, 

April 29, 1989, was attended by some 

5,000 residents in the Washington, D.C., 

area. 

The theme of National Science and 

Technology Week, "Everyone is a Scientist," was used. Displays, exhibits, and 

activities for the open house focused on 

getting across the message that science is 

an important and intrinsic part of everyone's daily life. One of the most popular 

24 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
events was "Ask the Scientist," which 

gave visitors an opportunity to bring in 

rocks and fossils to be identified by 

USGS geologists or to ask questions 

about local geology. At times, the crowds 

were so large that it was hard to hear— 

or see—the scientists. 

Another highlight that received great 

popular acclaim was the premiere showing of the new USGS/Smithsonian film, 

"Inside Hawaiian Volcanoes." 

The newly refurbished "Maps and 

Minds" exhibit—sponsored by the USGS 

and the National Geographic Society, and 

recently back from a 5-year tour around 

the Nation—provided a pleasant and 

educational walk through the history 

of mapmaking. "Maps and Minds" 

remained at the USGS through the 28th 

International Geological Congress in July 

in Washington, D.C., when hundreds 

more visitors from around the world 

came out to Reston to visit the National 

Center. The exhibit then began another 

5-year tour around the country through 

the Smithsonian Institution Traveling 

Exhibit Service. 

Other exhibits and displays at the 

open house featured coastal erosion, the 

Parkfield earthquake prediction experiment, scientific visualization—an exciting 

new world of computerized imagery, acid 

rain, and mineral resources. Special activities were set up for Girl Scout and Boy 

Scout groups at which information was 

available on which specific exhibits and 

presentations would satisfy badge 

requirements. 

Special tours took visitors to the treering laboratory, the extensive map and 

book collections of the USGS library, the 

Technology Information Center, the 

mainframe computer room, and the 

carbon-14 age-dating laboratory. Many 

intrepid visitors braved the pouring rain 

and enthusiastically ventured out to see 

the ground-water well on the USGS 

grounds. 

Visitors were able to purchase a special poster commemorating the 110th 

anniversary of the USGS, which featured 

an aerial view of the Reston area around 

the National Center. The Earth Science 

Information Center was open throughout 

the event, and waiting lines of visitors 

usually extended out of the door. 

Visitors were asked to fill out a brief 

questionnaire before they left. Comments 

Visitors—children and adults alike—enthusiastically looked at, handled, and identified 

major rock-forming minerals with the assistance of geologists and physical science technicians. Harvey Belkin and Jane Hammerstrom explained a common method of identifying 

minerals by using fingernails, copper pennies, glass, and stainless steel knife blades as a 

way to rank the hardness of minerals. 

Looking for flakes of gold was 

an activity in great demand at 

the April open house. Geologist 

John D'Agostino demonstrated 

how to shake the mineral pan so 

that the heavy minerals remain 

in the crease of the pan. Many 

young people enjoyed finding 

garnets, pyroxenes, and amphiboles among the gravels. 

were extremely positive, with "Excellent" 

often repeated. Many visitors said they 

would like to see more events like the 

open house in the future. Perhaps most 

rewarding were the comments about the 

enthusiasm and helpfulness of the USGS 

scientists and other personnel who were 

there to answer questions and to help the 

visitors. 

People and Programs of the U.S. Geological Survey 25 
Water Resources Investigations 


Mission 

The U.S. Geological Survey has the 

principal responsibility within the 

Federal Government to provide 

the hydrologic information and understanding needed by others to achieve the 

best use and management of the Nation's 

water resources. To accomplish this mission, the Water Resources Division, in 

cooperation with State, local, and other 

Federal agencies, 

• Systematically collects and analyzes 

data to evaluate the quantity, quality, and 

use of the Nation's water resources and 

provides results of these investigations to 

the public. 

• Conducts water-resources appraisals 

describing the occurrence, availability, 

and physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of surface and ground water. 

• Conducts basic and problem-oriented 

hydrologic and related research that aids 

in alleviating water-resources problems 

and provides an understanding of hydrologic systems sufficient to predict their 

response to natural or human-caused 

stress. 

• Coordinates the activities of Federal 

agencies in the acquisition of waterresources data for streams, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, and ground water. 

• Provides scientific and technical assistance in hydrologic fields to other Federal, State, and local agencies, to licensees 

of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and to international agencies on 

behalf of the Department of State. 

• Administers the State Water Resources Research Institutes Program and 

the National Water Resources Research 

Grants Program. 

Highlights 

Embudo: 100 Years of 

Influence on 

Water-Data Collection 

By Charles W. Boning 

The U.S. Geological Survey began its 

stream-gaging program 100 years ago on 

the Rio Grande near the village of 

Embudo in northern New Mexico. The 

site was selected by Major John Wesley 

Powell, the USGS's second Director, who 

recognized the need to develop techniques and procedures that would meet 

the requirements of legislation passed in 

October 1888 authorizing surveys of 

water resources for irrigation and flood 

prevention. 

Few people were knowledgeable 

about stream gaging in 1888; therefore, 

Powell envisioned a camp for training a 

cadre of young engineers who in turn 

could train others to carry out this aspect 

of the USGS's mission. Embudo was 

chosen for this training camp chiefly 

because it was accessible by railroad, and 

because gaging rivers in areas farther 

north was complicated by ice during winter. A western site was needed because 

the legislation specifically authorized such 

work only for arid lands, which excluded 

eastern streams. Also, the Rio Grande 

was an ideally sized river on which to 

conduct a training program. Also, data 

on flows of the Rio Grande were needed 

to help resolve issues of water rights with 

Mexico. 

26 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
The training camp was established in 

December 1888 with a select group of 

engineers who had recently graduated 

from eastern colleges. The trainees were 

led by Frederick Haynes Newell, who was 

later recognized as the father of systematic stream gaging. Because there was 

little available precedent for gaging 

streams, the group relied on their own 

innovations for developing stream-gaging 

procedures and for redesigning and 

refining equipment suitable for this purpose. Their first rudimentary efforts in 

December 1888 included measuring 

velocity by timing floats that were placed 

in the river and by measuring stream 

depths from a raft made from logs and 

barrels that was tied to a rope stretched 

across the river. Other data collected 

were water temperature, barometric pressure, and evaporation. The ingenuity of 

those first streamgagers was evident in 

how they measured evaporation. They 

borrowed a bread pan from the camp 

cook and measured evaporation by 

recording the loss of water from the pan. 

In January 1889, when more supplies and appropriate equipment arrived, 

the first USGS gaging station was constructed. The gage consisted of a stilling 

well that was dug into the gravel bank of 

the Rio Grande. By extending intake 

pipes from the well into the river, the 

engineers were ensured that the water 

level in the well was consistent with the 

level in the river. Although extremely 

rudimentary in construction, the basic 

design of this first gage is similar to 

gages still in use today. 

A makeshift shelter was built over 

the well to house an instrument that was 

provided by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic 

Survey to record water levels in the well. 

This recorder had a horizontal chart 

drum that turned with time. The water 

level in the well was sensed by a float that 

was attached to a wire suspended from a 

wheel on the recorder that turned as 

the river stage.changed. Here again, 

although bulky and relatively crude, the 

recorder operated on the same principle 

as many recorders still in operation 

today. 

To measure stream velocity, several 

types of meters were tested and modified 

as appropriate for the flow characteristics 

of the Rio Grande. Meters were redesigned to accommodate the shallow 

depths of the river, and the counting 

mechanisms were refined to avoid interference from weeds and grasses that 

were suspended or floating in the water. 

The engineers experimented with various 

procedures for making discharge measurements: they traversed the stream at a 

constant rate while the meter was suspended in the flow to integrate velocity 

across the stream; they raised and lowered the meter at a constant rate at 

points in the stream to integrate velocity 

from the water surface to the streambed, 

and they measured velocity using the 

meter that was held stationary at various 

points in the stream and at various 

depths. The procedures developed at 

Embudo by this pioneering group of 

engineers provided the framework for 

modern stream-gaging technology. 

The stream-gaging program grew in 

response to the need for data for irrigation, navigation, and flood prevention 

purposes. By 1900, about 160 gages had 

been established. In the following 

decades, growth in the stream-gaging 

program was more dramatic. Data were 

needed not only for large flood-control 

and irrigation projects but also for the 

expansion of hydroelectric power generation from the 1920's to the 1950's. The 

The men in the cable car are 

measuring the flow in the 

Arkansas River near Canyon, 

Colo., circa 1890 by using procedures developed at Embudo, 

N. Mex. (Photograph from U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 56, 1901.) 

Water Resources Investigations 27 
The present-day gaging station 

on the Rio Grande at Embudo, 

N. Mex. (Photograph from U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 778, 1971.) 

passage of legislation in 1929 that authorized the USGS cooperative program 

with State and local agencies was a major 

factor in the growth of the stream-gaging 

network as State officials recognized the 

need for data to effectively manage their 

water resources. Severe floods and 

droughts, such as those of the 1930's, 

recent energy crises, and water-quality 

legislation all have given impetus to the 

need for more streamflow data. 

The USGS maintains a 


national archive for water 


data and makes the 


information available 


to all. 


From the meager beginning at 

Embudo, the USGS data-collection networks have grown to more than 50,000 

sites where water-quantity, water-quality, 

or ground-water-level data are obtained, 

including a network of over 7,000 continuously recording stream-gaging stations 

and about 3,600 sites where streamflow 

data are gathered periodically each year. 

U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

RIO GRANDE GAGING STATION 

ESTABLISHED 1889� 

,• MAST GAGING STATION ESTABLISHED BY st
 

S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY r 


The USGS maintains a national archive 

for water data and makes the information available to Federal, State, and local 

agencies, to academia, and to thousands 

of people involved in the development 

and management of the surface-water 

resources of the country. The data also 

satisfy many needs of the research community in defining and understanding 

biological, chemical, hydraulic, and morphological processes in hydrologic 

systems. 

The USGS continues to exercise the 

same innovative spirit that was shown by 

those early scientists who established the 

first gaging station at Embudo. USGS 

scientists and technicians have made significant advances in designing instruments used to measure hydrologic 

parameters and record water-resources 

data. The USGS has established a modernized data storage, retrieval, and archival system, and developed and refined 

complex procedures used to study and 

simulate hydrologic processes. As the 

USGS faces such new and expanding 

challenges as intensifying water-quality 

research and emerging concerns of global change, the need for timely, accurate, 

and pertinent information remains as 

paramount today as it did for those early 

scientists at Embudo 100 years ago. 

28 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
--- - 

Hydrologic Function 

of Wetlands 

By Thomas C. Winter 

Scientists have long known that wetlands serve many important physical, 

chemical, and biological functions. In 

recent years, this awareness has become 

more widespread, and there is a public 

demand that wetlands be managed and 

preserved as essential parts of landscapes 

and ecosystems. Wetlands have not yet 

been extensively studied, however, and 

their functions are not well understood 

by the public. Because much remains 

unknown about wetlands, it is difficult to 

place a value on them. In order to manage wetlands effectively or to defend 

their preservation, it is critical that their 

essential function as part of the global 

ecosystem be understood. That understanding begins with their fundamental 

hydrology. 

Wetlands occur in virtually all physiographic regions. Wetlands can be a 

dominant part of the landscape, such as 

the vast tracts of wetland terrane in the 

arctic and subarctic, or a minor part, 

such as an oasis in a vast desert. In the 

temperate, subtropical, and tropical 

zones, wetlands differ greatly in size and 

are common features of the landscape. 

No matter what their size is relative to 

other parts of the landscape, wetlands 

are highly visible and significant in most 

areas because they commonly occur 

where the focus is on development and 

agriculture. 

The most common man-induced disturbances that affect wetlands are direct 

filling or drainage and modification of 

the uplands within the watershed. Wetlands are filled or drained to provide 

land for development, such as buildings, 

parking lots, roads, and airports, for 

agriculture, and for many other uses. 

Modification to upland watersheds 

adversely affects down-gradient wetlands 

because the water, chemical, and biological regimes are changed. 

Wetlands occur where a combination 

of physiographic and hydrologic conditions favor the accumulation and (or) 

retention of water. Physiographic conditions that tend to enhance the formation 

of wetlands include flat to minimal land 

slope, areas where steep land slopes abut 

low land slopes, and hummocky topography; hydrologic conditions include soils 

of low permeability and areas where 

ground water discharges at the land surface. 

Flat and (or) hummocky terrane and 

soils of low permeability are especially 

effective in the formation and maintenance of wetlands where surface water or 

precipitation is the source of water. In 

such settings, runoff is greatly retarded 

either by the low gradient or storage in 

depressions in the topography, and infiltration is also slow because of the low 

permeability of the soils. Examples of 

large regions that are characterized by 

low gradients and shallow depressions 

include glacial lake plains, such as the 

Glacial Lake Agassiz plain now occupied 

by the Red River of the North and the 

Red Lake peatlands in Minnesota; coastal 

lowlands along the Atlantic Ocean and 

Gulf of Mexico; and flood plains of 

major rivers. An example of a large 

region that is characterized by numerous 

depressions in a wide variety of sizes is 

the glaciated Northeastern and NorthCentral United States. Here, because the 

landscape is geologically young, an integrated drainage network has not been 

established, and storage of runoff water 

in depressions is extensive. 

The same landscape features that 

enhance formation of wetlands from 

surface-water sources also are important 

to ground-water-flow systems. Regional 

slope and local relief of the water table 

and permeability of the land surface are 

primary controls on ground-water-flow 

Land surface 

‘N at el.lable 

SEEPAGE FACE 

Area favorable for\ 

wetland formation 7, 

Direction of ground-water flow --" 3 

BREAK IN SLOPE o .{-1 t 1 Area of ground-U 1 water discharge N. 

-- 111 ,/ ~Line of equal 

/ -- /

/ hydraulic head // / / 

II/ /

Direction of I I ground -water 

flow FsI

I I 

I•I I I 

B 

Geologic boundaries associated 

with the formation of some 

types of wetlands. A, Development of a seepage face, caused 

by ground-water flow intersecting the land surface. B, Upward 

movement of ground water associated with a break in slope of 

the water table. The upward 

movement occurs in the lower 

slope segment near the break in 

slope. 

Water Resources Investigations 29 
Schematic of the hydrologic 

function of wetlands; that is, the 

interaction between atmospheric 

water, surface water, and 

ground water, in the context of 

a generalized landscape. The 

generalized landscape consists of 

a relatively flat upland and lowland separated by a steeper 

slope. Furthermore, the land 

surfaces can be smooth and uniform (A) or hummocky (B). The 

landscape is generalized because 

it is characteristic of many physiographic settings and scales, 

such as high moraines adjacent 

to lower moraines or glacial lake 

plains, uplands adjacent to river 

valleys, high terraces adjacent to 

lower terraces, and coastal 

scarps adjacent to coastal 

lowlands. 

systems. An additional feature, a break in 

slope of both land surface and the water 

table, also commonly results in the formation of wetlands. 

Considering wetlands in the framework of ground-water-flow systems is 

appropriate because, as is the case with 

most surface water, wetlands are hydrologic features where considerable interaction takes place between ground water 

and surface water. In a generalized landscape that has uniform, low-gradient land 

slopes, for example, precipitation falling 

on an upland will run off slowly because 

of the low hydraulic gradient. If the soil 

has low permeability, infiltration is slow, 

thus enhancing the potential for evapotranspiration because of the long residence time of the water on the land surface. If the upland consists of highly 

permeable material, infiltration and 

therefore ground-water recharge is 

enhanced, the potential for evapotranspiration is less, and little precipitation will run off. Regardless of permeability, regional flow systems 

predominate: ground water recharges 

beneath the upland and ground water 

discharges in the lowland. The lowland is 

the most favorable location for wetland 

formation because surface runoff from 

the upland is coupled with the regional 

ground-water discharge. Furthermore, 

the potential for water loss by evapotranspiration is great because of the abundant supply of water from both sources. 

UPLAND 

Uniform low slope 

-. VALLEY SIDE� --- Uniform steeper slope ta› 

LOWLAND 

.e \ssyk%� 

Uniform low slope 

Direction of ground-water flow 

A 

UPLAND 

Hummocky, low regional slope 

VALLEY SIDE 


Hummocky, steeper regional slope 


LOWLAND 

Hummocky, low regional 

slope 

Direction of ground-water flow 

In a generalized landscape that has 

hummocky topography, ground-waterflow systems are more complex. Here, 

numerous small, local flow systems form 

at shallow depths and are underlain by 

more extensive regional flow systems. 

Part of the precipitation that falls on any 

part of a hummocky landscape runs into 

depressions where much of the water is 

returned to the atmosphere by evapotranspiration. With respect to local 

The complex and dynamic 


interactions . . . in wetland 


ecosystems are a 


challenge to . . . effective 


management. 


ground-water-flow systems throughout 

the landscape, however, some depressions are areas of recharge, some are 

areas of discharge, and others serve both 

functions. In upland areas, for example, 

some of the recharge from the depressions is to regional flow systems, and, in 

lowland areas, some of the ground-water 

discharge to depressions is from regional 

flow systems. Additional complexities 

include seasonal flow reversals caused by 

recharge near wetland edges, bank storage during periods of high water levels 

in the wetlands, and the presence of 

phreatophytic plants. 

The complex and dynamic interactions between precipitation, surface 

water, and ground water in wetland ecosystems are a challenge to understanding 

and then developing effective management of these systems. For example, wetlands that recharge ground water commonly hold water for only part of the 

year. Because these are easiest to drain, 

they are commonly drained first. Unfortunately, drainage of wetlands that 

receive ground-water discharge commonly does not result in a gain of that 

land for other uses, because not only 

does drainage not stop the ground-water 

discharge, it also results in the deposition 

of salts and (or) in unstable soils. Thus, 

the wetland is lost and use of the land is 

lost as well. 

It is essential also to understand the 

hydrologic function of wetlands from the 

30 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
perspective of the chemicals that wetlands can transport. For example, if contaminants are released from a wetland 

that recharges ground water, the contaminants will move through local groundwater-flow systems and discharge into 

nearby wetlands. If the wetland also 

recharges regional flow systems, the contaminants could affect a much larger 

area, eventually discharging into wetlands 

in the lowlands. 

In managing wetlands, it is especially 

important to be aware of the seasonal 

reversal of flow conditions near wetland 

boundaries. A one-time or short-term 

study of a wetland can be misleading 

because flow directions commonly 

reverse near wetland edges. A condition 

measured at one time, and upon which a 

management decision is based, may not 

persist, thereby confounding that decision. Furthermore, the highly dynamic 

flow regime near wetland boundaries 

makes it particularly difficult to determine and map the extent of wetlands, 

presently one of the most highly visible 

problems facing the Nation today 

and one that is receiving considerable 

attention. 

In summary, wetlands are a highly 

dynamic hydrologic feature throughout 

the landscape. Wetlands interact extensively with the atmosphere by discharging 

large volumes of water from both 

surface- and ground-water sources 

through evapotranspiration. Because they 

exist along the edges of most surfacewater bodies, wetlands also have an 

important role in surface-water hydrology by controlling flow velocities, sediment transport, and shore erosion. Wetlands are also important areas of groundwater discharge and, in some settings, are 

areas of critical ground-water recharge. 

All of these hydrologic functions and 

their interactions must be considered in 

managing wetlands. Currently, however, 

the data base upon which management 

schemes must be derived is extremely 

small and only covers a few localities. 

Additional studies that investigate the 

critical role of wetlands in the local, 

regional, and national hydrologic scheme 

are needed, therefore, to better understand and quantify the interactive processes of wetlands. 

Hydrologic Effects of 

Climatic Change in the 

Delaware River Basin 

By Mark A. Ayers, David M. 

Wolock, Gregory J. McCabe, and 

Lauren E. Hay 

The greenhouse effect is an essential 

component of the climatic processes that 

support life on Earth. Without the presence of certain gases, the Earth's atmosphere would be about 50 Fahrenheit 

degrees colder than it is now. Since the 

Industrial Revolution in the mid-1800's, 

concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide 

(CO2) and methane, have been increasing 

steadily. Concentrations of atmospheric 

CO2 are expected to double in the next 

century, reaching levels that probably 

have not existed on Earth in more than a 

million years. The current consensus 

among scientists is that an increase in the 

concentration of greenhouse gases in the 

atmosphere will result in global warming. 

Estimates indicate that the average global 

air temperature could increase from 2 to 

7 Fahrenheit degrees as a result of a 

doubling of atmospheric CO2, according 

to the National Academy of Sciences. 

Despite the general consensus concerning 

the inevitability of global warming, much 

uncertainty associated with climatic 

change still exists. The definition of the 

processes involved in global warming and 

their attendant effects on water resources, therefore, present a major scientific 

challenge for the next few decades. 

In 1988, the USGS began an interdisciplinary study of the sensitivity of 

water resources to the potential effects of 

climatic change in the 12,765-square-mile 

Delaware River basin. In view of the 

uncertainty of climatic-change projections 

and because the effects of climatic 

change on basin hydrology are poorly 

understood, this study focuses on defining the basic relations of water-resource 

systems to current climate and the effects 

of simple assumptions of future climatic 

change on the sensitivity of these systems. 

Water Resources Investigations 31 
76° 74° 

NEW ( YORK 

42° 494,

6,

0c 

/o 

0 4/00,k 

0 ,On, q 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Basin 

41° Boundary 

(

New York 

City 

Trenton 

NEW - JERSEY 40° Philadelphia 

CAMDEN 

AREA NEW CASTLE 

AREA 

I • 

Delaware if CAPE MAY 

Base from Delaware River Basin Commission, 1986. 

39° 

I • I \)ELA 

13av 

ARE AREA 

0 10 6620 30 40 MILES 

I 66I I I I I I 

0 20 40 KILOMETERS 

Delaware River basin study area. Climate Modeling 

Two regional climate models have 

been developed to estimate (1) current 

variability of daily temperature and precipitation over the basin and (2) scenarios 

of climatic change for the basin. The first 

climate model randomly predicts consecutive wet and dry periods and precipitation intensities for the wet periods. The 

approach replicates historical temperature and precipitation records well 

enough to allow hydrologists to evaluate 

how streamflow responds over space 

and time to differing temperature and 

amounts of precipitation. This climate 

model is linked directly to the watershed 

model that simulates daily streamflow. 

The second climate model randomly 

predicts the daily weather pattern over 

the basin, such as a high-pressure system, 

a cold-frontal passage, or a warm-frontal 

passage. The model then assigns values 

of climate variables (temperature and 

precipitation) based on the observed relations between the variables and weather 

patterns in historical records. The approach also accurately replicates the 

statistics of historical climate records and 

provides a means of estimating climatic 

variability over the entire basin. Initial 

analyses indicate that the frequency of 

weather patterns for present climatic conditions simulated by global climate models is similar to the frequency of 

observed weather patterns for the basin. 

In order to check future scenarios, 

hydrologists used the model to simulate 

conditions in which the amount of CO2 

in the atmosphere doubled. Data from 

this scenario are being analyzed to determine the resulting change in frequencies 

of weather patterns, which will then be 

used to define temperature and precipitation changes for the basin. 

Watershed Modeling 

Monthly streamflow models (with 

and without reservoir data) and a daily 

streamflow model (without reservoir 

data) have been developed to analyze the 

effects of climatic change on streamflow 

in the basin. Reservoir operations are 

being added to the daily streamflow 

model in order to incorporate management options into the assessment of climatic change in the basin. 

Several analyses of streamflow sensitivity to climate variables already have 

been completed. Analyses of the effects 

of climatic changes on monthly streamflow that were made by using a monthly 

water-balance model without reservoir 

data indicate that winter warming would 

cause an increase in the proportion of 

precipitation as rain in the northern part 

of the basin. This effect would reduce 

snow accumulation, increase winter runoff, and reduce spring and summer runoff. Estimates of total annual runoff indicate that a 5-percent increase over current precipitation amounts would be 

32 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
needed to counteract runoff decreases 

resulting from a warming of 4 Fahrenheit degrees; a 15-percent increase would 

be needed for a warming of 7 Fahrenheit 

degrees. A warming of from 4 to 7 Fahrenheit degrees, without corresponding 

precipitation increases, would cause a 9­

to 25-percent decrease in total annual 

runoff. When reservoir data are factored 

into the model, a significantly greater 

risk of a drought emergency exists in 

which reservoir levels are too low to meet 

demand—for scenarios in which precipitation does not increase sufficiently to 

offset the CO2-induced warming. 

A topographically based hydrologic 

model was developed and linked with the 

wet/dry climate model to analyze the sensitivity of daily streamflow. Results of this 

model, without reservoir data, indicate 

that the overall effect of warming is to 

decrease daily streamflow. Most of this 

decrease would occur in the warmer seasons. In the northern part of the basin 

where snow accumulation currently is 

significant, the warming actually would 

result in an increase in the February 

average and maximum daily flow, regardless of precipitation changes, because 

of the increased precipitation as rain. 

In general, the model showed that 

watershed runoff was more sensitive to 

changes in precipitation intensity than 

to changes in precipitation duration or 

temperature. 

Estuary Modeling 

A sea-level rise, which is likely to 

accompany global warming, would alter 

estuarine salinity. Scientific consensus 

indicates a global warming of about 7 

Fahrenheit degrees for conditions of 

double CO2 would result in an estimated 

sea-level rise of from 0.5 to 4.5 feet. In 

the Delaware River Estuary, a rise of 2.4 

feet would cause the saltwater front to 

move about 8 miles farther upstream. 

Both the rise in sea level and the saltwater movement could have serious implications for the continued availability of 

surface and ground water in the area of 

the upstream saltwater movement. 

Ground-Water Modeling 

Three ground-water models will be 

used to assess the effects of sea-level rise 

and the resulting changes in salinity on 

ground-water availability. The final calibration of these models is near completion. An available model of the aquifer 

system near New Castle, Del., was used 

for sensitivity analyses. The model results 

indicate that this semi-confined aquifer 

system is sensitive to the flooding that 

would result from a rise in estuary levels. 

Because of the presence of a confining 

unit under the estuary that restricts the 

movement of saline water into the aquifer, a sea-level rise of 5 feet alone would 

not result in a significant change in 

recharge of saline estuary water into this 

aquifer system. A combination of flooding and a sea-level rise of 5 feet, however, would triple the amount of saltwater recharged to the aquifer system 

because the flooding would extend 

beyond the confining unit. A second 

ground-water model will focus on potential changes resulting from sea-level rise 

on saltwater intrusion in an unconfined 

aquifer system near Cape May, N.J. A 

third model will assess the effects of the 

extended movement of saltwater in the 

estuary on saltwater intrusion and 

ground-water availability in a multiplelayered confined-aquifer system near 

Camden, N.J. 

Results of simple analyses of the 

potential global warming on water 

resources in the Delaware River basin 

suggest serious implications for future 

availability of water-related resources. In 

this humid, temperate climate, where 

precipitation is distributed evenly 

throughout the year, decreases in snow 

accumulation in the northern part of the 

basin and increases in evapotranspiration 

throughout the basin could change the 

temporal distribution of runoff and 

reduce streamflow by as much as from 9 

to 25 percent unless precipitation 

increased. Also, ground-water recharge 

of saline estuary water in one aquifer 

near New Castle, Del., could double with 

a sea-level rise of 5 feet. USGS scientists 

will continue to refine and complete the 

models and scenarios in order to quantify 

more accurately the effects and associated risks of the various potential climatic 

and sea-level changes on streamflow and 

ground water in the Delaware River 

basin. 

Water Resources Investigations 33 
irrigation or drainage facilities con- Investigation of Water structed or managed by the DOI, 

Quality, Bottom national wildlife refuges managed by the

DOI, and other migratory-bird or

Sediment, and Biota endangered-species management areas 

that receive water from DOI projects. Associated With Nine of the 19 locations were 

selected for reconnaissance-level investi- Irrigation Drainage in gations during fiscal years 1986-87. 

Study teams composed of three scientists, the Western United one each from the USGS (team leader),

States 	 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 

the Bureau of Reclamation, were formed 

to conduct the investigations at each loca- By Herman R. Feltz, Richard A. tion. Surface and ground water, bottom 

Engberg, and Marc A. Sylvester sediment, and biota were investigated at 

each location. Reports for completed 

In response to concerns expressed by studies are shown in table 1. Reconthe U.S. Congress over contamination at naissance-level investigations were started 

the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge in fiscal year 1988 at the remaining 10 

in California, the Department of the sites identified by the Task Group. 

Interior (DOI) started a program in 1985 Reports for these studies will be pubto identify the nature and extent of lished in fiscal year 1990. A 20th 

irrigation-induced water-quality problems study for the Pine River area in souththat might exist in other western areas western Colorado was added in fiscal 

where the DOI has responsibility. The year 1989 (fig. 1). 

DOI formed a Task Group on Irrigation In the first nine study areas, analyses 

Drainage, an interbureau group chaired of water, bottom sediment, and biota 

by the USGS. Initially, the Task Group sampled were evaluated against Federal 

identified 19 locations in 13 States that and State water-quality regulations and 

warranted reconnaissance-level investiga- criteria, baseline data for adjacent areas, 

tions (fig. 1). These locations relate to and other guidelines that might be helpthree specific areas of DOI responsibility: ful in making assessments of adverse 

0 

MT Bowdoin National 

C) Wildlife Refuge 

Sun River and Milk River 

Belle Fourche Reclamation Project OR6 Riverton ID 	 Reclamation SD 1 Malheur National 	 • tjnit • Angostura Rec mation Unit EXPLANATION

Wildlife Refuge • American • 


Falls Reservoir 
 WY ()Kendrick Reclamation Project Detailed study sites* Klamath River NE 

refuges NV 0 1988-90

0 Middle Green River 

°Stillwater Wildlife Reconnaissance investigation areas Sacramento River 

refuges Management Area UT • CO 	 0 1986-87 Gunnison River and CA Sweiter Lake • 1988-89 

Pine River *These sites were also Tulare Lake NM reconnaissance investigation

AZ areas in 1986-87 Bosque Del Apache 

• National Wildlife Refuge Salton Lower Colorado River 

TX 

Figure 1. Study locations and 

dates, National Irrigation Drain- Lower Rio Grande and Laguna Atascosa 

National Wildlife Refuge age Program, Western United 

States. 

34 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
tom sediment, and biota associated with irrigation drainage 

TABLE 1. Water-resources investigations reports (WRIR) completed for reconnaissance investigations of water quality, botArea6 Report number 

Lower Colorado River valley, Arizona, California, and Nevada, 1986-87 WRIR 88-4002 

Salton Sea area, California, 1986-87 WRIR 89-4102 

Tulare Lake bed area, southern San Joaquin Valley, Calif., 1986-87 WRIR 88-4001 

Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge and adjacent areas of the Milk River basin, WRIR 87-4243 

northeastern Montana, 1986-87 

Sun River area, west-central Montana, 1986-87 WRIR 87-4244 

Stillwater Wildlife Management Area, Churchill County, Nev., 1986-87 WRIR 89-4105 

Lower Rio Grande valley and Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge, WRIR 87-4277 

Tex., 1986-87 

Middle Green River basin, Utah, 1986-87 WRIR 88-4011 

Kendrick reclamation project area, Wyoming, 1986-87 WRIR 87-4255 

TABLE 2. Constituents of concern in detailed study areas 

Study area Media Constituents of concern 

Kendrick reclamation Water Selenium. 

project area, Bottom sediment Selenium, uranium. 

Wyoming. Biota Selenium, boron. 

Middle Green Water Selenium, boron, zinc. 

River basin, Utah. Bottom sediment Selenium, uranium. 

Biota Selenium, boron, zinc. 

Salton Sea area, Water Selenium, boron, salinity. 

California. Bottom sediment Selenium, DDD,* DDE.* 

Biota Selenium, boron. 

Stillwater Wildlife Water Arsenic, boron, uranium, 

Management Area, salinity, unionized ammonia. 

Nevada. Bottom sediment Arsenic, selenium, lithium, mercury, molybdenum. 

Biota Arsenic, selenium, mercury, boron, chromium, 

copper, zinc. 

*Breakdown derivatives of DDT. 

effects on fish, wildlife, and humans. quality problems exist and (2) to provide 

Water samples were analyzed for major the scientific understanding needed to 

ions, nutrients, selected trace elements, develop reasonable alternatives that will 

radiochemical constituents, and for pesti- mitigate or resolve identified problems. 

cides at sites where they were used. Sam- Within this context, the working objective 

ples of bottom sediment and biota were for a detailed study is to determine the 

analyzed for selected trace elements and, extent, magnitude, and effects of conat some sites, pesticides. taminants associated with agricultural 

Because some constituents exceeded drainage and the sources and exposure 

water-quality regulations or criteria in pathways that cause contamination where 

samples from four of the first nine study contaminant effects are documented. 

areas, the DOI Task Group made the To ensure that all areas having probdecision to proceed with detailed studies lems related to irrigation drainage in 

of these four areas. These areas and the Western States were identified, a compreconstituents of concern are given in table hensive survey of all DOI irrigation 

2. Slightly elevated levels of some constit- projects and wildlife management areas 

uents were found in water, bottom sedi- was conducted in fiscal years 1988 and 

ment, or biota in some of the five re- 1989. Fifteen additional areas that may 

maining areas, but the levels were not require additional investigation were 

considered of sufficient concern to rec- identified. These areas are underommend detailed studies; however, some going intensive evaluation of existinginlevel of long-term monitoring may be formation to determine whether a 

initiated at those five sites. reconnaissance-level investigation is 

The four detailed studies are ori- necessary. 

ented toward meeting two goals: (1) to Results of the completed reconnaisconfirm that irrigation-induced water- sance-level investigations and preliminary 

Water Resources Investigations 35 
data from the ongoing reconnaissance 

investigations and detailed studies provided the following generalizations for 

areas where problems have been 

detected: 

• Elevated concentrations of trace elements have been detected in several of 

the study areas, and pesticides have been 

detected in some of the study areas; 

• Alkaline, oxidized soils that contain 

elevated concentrations of trace elements 

in semiarid environments indicate potential problem areas; 

• Selenium, boron, arsenic, and mercury are the constituents found most 

often at elevated concentrations in water, 

bottom sediment, and biota in the study 

areas; 

• Concentrations of arsenic and selenium tend to vary inversely; and 

• The highest concentrations of constituents occur in internal drainage basins. 

Water planners and managers throughout the Western United States will use 

the results of these studies to alleviate 

water-quality problems resulting from 

irrigation drainage. 

The Effects of 

Agricultural 

Land-Management 

Practices on Surface 

and Ground Water in 

the Piedmont of North 

Carolina 

By Catherine L. Hill and 

Douglas A. Harned 

Agricultural practices, such as how 

the land is tilled and how much and in 

what manner pesticides and herbicides 

are used, are major sources of sediment, 

nutrients, and synthetic organics in 

surface-water runoff and of nutrients 

and organics in ground water. The 

extent, however, to which agricultural 

practices serve as a nonpoint source of 

pollution is largely a function of how the 

agricultural land is managed. 

Farmers can use land-management 

practices that control erosion, increase 

soil moisture, and reduce the transport 

of farm chemicals and fertilizer in runoff 

from the fields. These methods, which 

are generally referred to as bestmanagement practices, include development of grassed waterways and field borders, strip cropping, contour farming, 

and crop rotation. In contrast, when traditional or standard land-management 

practices are used, waterways are poorly 

maintained, crop production is continuous and without rotation, and the rows 

are plowed straight without regard to 

slope or topography. 

To better define how agricultural 

land-management practices affect water 

quality, the USGS in cooperation with the 

Guilford Soil and Water Conservation 

District and the U.S. Soil Conservation 

Service began a 6-year study in 1984 of 

four small basins in the Piedmont of 

North Carolina. The Piedmont, a physiographic province extending from Virginia through Alabama, is characterized 

by clayey soils, rolling topography, and 

abundant rainfall. This area was chosen 

because of the highly erosive nature of 

the soils and the ongoing local effort 

to convert existing farmland to bestmanagement practices. Results of this 

study should be transferable to similar 

agricultural lands throughout the Piedmont physiographic region of the Southeastern United States. 

The study is designed to monitor 

chemicals applied to the land through 

farming practices as well as nutrients 

resulting naturally from atmospheric 

deposition. It also monitors water quantity and quality of overland runoff, concentrations of chemical constituents percolating through the clay soils in the 

unsaturated zone, and constituents reaching the ground water. Farmers cooperating in the study are helping keep 

detailed records of the chemicals applied 

to their fields and of their farming activities such as plowing. Data collection is 

scheduled to end September 1990. 

Four areas including two row-crop 

fields, a mixed land-use basin, and a forested basin were selected for study. The 

row-crop fields are adjacent—one having 

best-management practices (7.4 acres) 

36 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
and the other having standardmanagement practices (4.8 acres). The 

amount of sediment, nutrients, and 

selected organics in runoff and the volume of runoff were monitored for the 

two fields as were the nitrate plus nitrite 

and pesticide content of soil water. 

In the mixed land-use basin (665 

acres), changes over time in water-quality 

constituents in runoff are being monitored at a streamflow gage, as standardmanagement practices are converted to 

best-management practices over the 

duration of the project. In the forested 

basin (44 acres), background hydrologic 

and chemical-quality conditions are monitored. These areas are within a 4-mile 

radius, and the effects of atmospheric 

deposition, which is monitored at one of 

the agricultural field sites, are assumed to 

be equal among all four areas. 

Analysis of surface-water-runoff data 

through May 1989 indicates that for the 

two row-crop fields, in general, concentrations of sediment, nutrients, and 

selected organics in runoff from the field 

having best-management practices are 

dramatically lower than the concentrations found in the field having standard 

practices. A general relation appears to 

exist for nutrients and sediment concentrations for the four sites and for precipitation. With the exception of nitrogen, 

the lowest constituent concentrations are 

measured in precipitation, followed by 

increasing concentrations in runoff from 

the forested area, the field site having 

best land-management practices, and the 

mixed land-use site, with the standardpractices field site having the highest 

concentrations. Interestingly, nitrate plus 

nitrite concentrations were found to be 

higher in precipitation than those measured in runoff at the forested site, probably because the nutrient was bound up by 

the forest litter and also used by the 

plants. 

The difference in sediment concentrations between the two agricultural 

fields is striking. The standard-management practices field had a mean concentration of 11,200 milligrams per liter 

presence of 14 small farm ponds in the 

basin that act as sediment traps. 

The erosion process, which creates 

suspended sediment and the resulting 

sediment yield, tends to sort the soil particles by carrying away the fine silts and 

clays associated with most of the soil fertility. Sediment yields—the amount of 

suspended sediment moving past the 

runoff gage—are consistently higher in 

the field having standard land-management practices than yields in the field 

having best land-management practices. 

During the 1987 water year, the sediment yield from the basin having standard practices was almost 36 tons per acre, 

compared with 5.4 tons per acre that 

came off the field having best-management practices. 

A seasonal comparison of runoff differences between the two agricultural 

fields shows that the greatest amount of 

runoff occurred in the standardmanagement practices field during the 

growing season (May—September) and in 

the best-management practices field in 

the barren season (October—April). This 

is probably because during the growing 

season there is more bare, hardened 

ground, which promotes runoff, in the 

NUMBER OF SAMPLES 

�
22 57 75 75 70

3.0 z 
 O 

H 2.5 cc ccw 


w


c.> 2.0 z w 

cp 

ix cc 1.5 	

• r.D 2 — 

1.0 C/3 

Z k 


0.5 

O 


� T -r 

,§kC' e k." • 

Spa ese ct 

aka 

.et's• e's 

EXPLANATION 

Quartile (Q) 

Comparison of total phosphorus 

concentrations, in milligrams 

(mg/L), compared with the best-management practices field mean concentration 

of 3,230 mg/L. Sediment concentrations 

for the mixed land-use basin were generally lower than those observed for the 

agricultural field sites because of the 

Interquartile range ( HP) 

,..—.—_, — Largest observation > Q (.75) + 1.5 IQR 	 per liter, in samples of precipitation, and of surface-water --75th percentile - 0 (.75) 

runoff from the forested and __Mean mixed land-use basins and the — 50th percentile - Q (.50) best land-management and — 25th percentile - Q (.25) standard land-management field 

Smallest observation < Q (.25) - 1.5 IQR sites. 

Water Resources Investigations 37 
Comparison of mean concentrations of total nitrate plus nitrite, 

in milligrams per liter, in samples of surface-water runoff, of 

water in the unsaturated zone, 

and of ground water from the 

two field sites having best landmanagement and standard landmanagement practices. 

standard-management practices field. In 

contrast, this same field has more plowed 

ground in the barren season. Plowing the 

ground increases the surface runoff and 

promotes infiltration by causing water to 

be trapped. In spite of the fact that the 

runoff is greater on the average in the 

best-management practices field during 

the barren season, sediment yields during 

this period are still lower than those 

observed for the standard-management 

practices field. This difference indicates 

that the effect of best-management practices in reducing sediment losses is significant enough to compensate for the additional runoff. 

The effects of land-management 

practices on ground-water quality are not 

as apparent as the effects on surface 

water. Mean concentrations of total 

nitrate plus nitrite in the upper unsaturated zone (3 feet below land surface) are 

higher in the field having standardmanagement practices where concentrations averaged 1.7 mg/L compared with 

1.0 mg/L in the field having bestmanagement practices. Water samples 

collected in the unsaturated zone 6 feet 

below land surface and from ground 

water from 10 to 15 feet below land surface, however, have concentrations 

slightly higher in the best-management 

practices field than those measured in 

the standard-practices field. Levels of 

pesticide residues measured in soil samples tend to be higher in the bestmanagement practices field compared 

with the standard-management practices 

field. 

USGS hydrologists are continuing 

their sampling of surface and ground 

water in the four study areas. The 

project results thus far support the need 

2.0 

1.8 Best-management 1.7 

1.6 practices 

1.4 _ r7Standard-management 

for further study of the effects of landmanagement practices in clay-type soils 

on ground-water quality. In particular, 

the hydrologists will be interested to see 

what changes over time occur in water 

quality in the mixed land-use basin as 

it is converted to best-management 

practices. 

Relations Between 

Land Use and Nitrate 

Concentrations in 

Shallow Ground 

Water, Delmarva 

Peninsula 

By Pixie A. Hamilton and 

Robert J. Shedlock 

The USGS began to develop a 

National Water-Quality Assessment 

(NAWQA) pilot program in 1986. The 

long-term goals of the program are to 

describe the status of and trends in the 

quality of the Nation's surface- and 

ground-water resources and to provide a 

sound, scientific understanding of the 

primary natural and human factors that 

affect the quality of these resources. 

The Delmarva Peninsula is one of 

seven pilot project areas in the NAWQA 

program. As a first step, USGS hydrologists gathered existing water-quality data, 

interpreted the compiled data, and then 

developed a preliminary regional waterquality assessment of ground water in the 

peninsula. Their assessment showed that 

the existing data were unsuitable for 

regional analysis because of inconsistent 

sampling methods, incomplete informaMILLIGRAMS PER LITER

1.2 

practices tion on the locations and depth of wells, 

1.0 1.0 

1.0 and the hydrogeology of the aquifers 

into which the wells tap. The assessment 0.8 	 also showed that apparent relations 0.6 0.6 0.6 	 0.5 between water-quality constituents, such 0.4 	 as nitrate, and ancillary features, such as 

0.2 	 land use, may depend on the scale of the 

0 	 maps depicting the ancillary data. The 


Ground6 

6 

6 FT 3 FT 6 

Surface implications of these findings are well 
 water Unsaturated zone water illustrated by the relation between land 

38 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
 

use and nitrate concentrations in shallow 

ground water in the peninsula. 

The Delmarva Peninsula, located in 

the Coastal Plain physiographic province, 

is comprised of most of Delaware and the 

entire Eastern Shore of Maryland and 

Virginia. The land area is about 6,050 

square miles, of which about 48 percent 

is used for agriculture. Woodlands constitute about 31 percent of the land area 

and commonly are interspersed with 

agricultural areas. The degree to which 

agricultural lands and woodlands are 

interspersed depends in large measure 

on the physiography of the area. Poorly 

drained uplands, primarily located in the 

central part of the peninsula, are dominated by relatively small plots with interspersed woodlands and agricultural 

areas. Well-drained areas, which flank 

the central upland, typically are dominated by large agricultural tracts. Urban 

or built-up land, most extensive in the 

northern part of the peninsula, composes 

about 7 percent of the land area; the 

remaining land areas are wetlands or 

barren. 

One of the chief water-quality concerns on the Delmarva Peninsula is elevated nitrate concentrations in shallow 

ground water, which probably are derived from human-related sources such 

as septic tank effluents, livestock wastes, 

and fertilizers. Results from previous 

studies show that the highest nitrate concentrations are found in agricultural 

areas and in urban or built-up land having well-drained sediments. Lowest 

nitrate concentrations are found in woodlands having poorly drained and relatively impermeable sediments. 

Nitrate concentrations ranged from 

0.1 to 59.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L) as 

nitrogen in samples collected from 399 

wells in the surficial aquifer by USGS 

personnel from 1944 through 1987, 

prior to the start of the NAWQA program. The drinking-water standard for 

nitrate, established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is 10 mg/L as 

nitrogen. The initial analysis of the relations between nitrate concentrations in 

ground water and land use revealed 

median nitrate concentrations in groundwater samples from the 399 wells of 0.9 

mg/L in woodlands, 2.9 mg/L in urban or 

built-up land, and 4.9 mg/L in agricultural areas. 

76 ° 

6 

75° 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Wilmington 

Elkton 

NEW JERSEY 

NEW 

CASTLE 

CECIL I 

--, J KENT ,' 

Chestertown • QUEEN I l'- ,..dh; --- A---'—'' NChNEeSs ,---h -i Dover . 

e , 1 KENT Centreville, / 39° 

I Denton -)--

• I \

TALBOT \ — / 

6 Easton \--DELAWARE \ • Rehoboth 

/6 I • Beach • CAROLINE 

,-- C prow, _,:-_,„, Georgetown ,,,,, • ----42,) Seaford 

0-4{? Cambridge , I SUSSEX 

\CDORCHESTERg

r. c „..sty-' 

- --

6 

--k-

`._,,' W,LCOM•IsCaOlisbuzil • 

_1'. 

cess • \ 

Anne fit' _.____ -/a- ,z5.2" Stow (--) % ..4x<<.,r Hill ',', a 

1 ,-- ',....p rn . , S—Pi 1 1".-= •---, '''''''..- 38 cr 

VIRGINIA 

rn • Accomac 

Exmore ACCOMACK

ty_ Eastville wt: / A 7.-

Charlesi Cae • 0 10 20 30 MILES

I 

III II 

0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS 

The differences in these median 

nitrate concentrations indicate that land 

use does influence nitrate concentrations 

in ground water in the Delmarva Peninsula. The observed relations with land 

use, however, may be affected by the 

large differences in the depths of the 

wells (from 3 to about 300 feet) and differences in the time of sampling (from 

1944 through 1987). For example, the 

depth at which the sample was obtained 

may introduce inaccuracy because deeper 

ground water may originate from more 

distant recharge areas that have different 

land use. The year the sample was obtained may also affect the land-use correlation because of improved methods of 

preserving samples. Preserving nitrate 

Map of the Delmarva Peninsula, 

which is one of the pilot studies 

in the National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program. 

Water Resources Investigations 39 
Example of how woodlands 

(shaded) and agricultural land 

(unshaded) are interspersed in 

the Delmarva Peninsula (data 

digitized and GIS-generated 

from the Clayton, Del., 

1:24,000-scale USGS topographic quadrangle map, 

1977 photoinspection edition). 

INTERSPERSION OF LAND USE 


Delmarva Peninsula 


75°43'45" 

39° 

21' 

15" 

2000 FEET 

1 

0 

6 

500 METERS 

EXPLANATION 

Agricultural Land Woodland 

Seasonal Pond 

concentrations in water samples collected 

prior to the mid-1970's only included 

chilling to 39 °F at the time of sampling; 

the more recent standard procedure 

includes chilling and adding mercuric 

chloride, which improves the stability of 

nitrate concentrations. Therefore, early 

nitrate data may be misleadingly low. 

Problems related to differences in 

the depth of wells and year of sample 

collection can be reduced by restricting 

the analysis to samples collected from 

shallow wells in the surficial aquifer during recent years. Thus, data since 1980 

for nitrate concentrations at 62 of the 

399 wells, all having depths less than or 

equal to 30 feet, were assessed separately. 

This analysis indicated median nitrate 

concentrations of 0.9 mg/L in urban or 

built-up land, 5.8 mg/L in agricultural 

areas, and 7.0 mg/L in woodlands, surprisingly high for ground water underlying woodlands. This may be caused by 

the relatively coarse resolution of the 

land-use data (at the 1:250,000 scale used 

in this analysis, the minimum differentiated size for agricultural and woodland 

areas is 40 acres, and a well located in 

the middle of a 35-acre farm surrounded 

by a forest often would be categorized as 

woodland) and the limited geographic 

distribution of the 62 wells (more than 35 

percent are located in the poorly drained 

uplands where woodland and agricultural 

areas are well interspersed). 

By using larger scale, more detailed 

maps (1:24,000 scale) that are shaded to 

distinguish woodlands from agricultural 

and urbanized areas, USGS hydrologists 

were better able to determine the relation 

of land use to the water-quality data for 

the 62 wells. Based on this analysis, 

median nitrate concentrations are 0.6 

mg/L in woodlands and 6.7 mg/L in agricultural areas. Median nitrate concentration in urban or built-up land was not 

assessed because only 2 of the 62 wells 

are located in urbanized areas. These 

results are more consistent with the 

expectation that nitrate concentrations in 

ground water are lower in woodlands, 

which suggests that verifying apparent 

relations between nitrate concentrations 

and land use may depend upon the availability and use of more detailed land-use 

data. 

The next step was for the hydrologists to collect samples for nitrate analyses from shallow wells that were installed 

in the surficial aquifer throughout the 

Delmarva Peninsula as part of the 

NAWQA project. These newly collected 

samples also were examined for land-use 

relations. The wells are located in subregions that have different hydrogeologic 

and physiographic features. Wells were 

drilled in woodland and agricultural 

areas and also in selected sites downgradient from these two predominant land 

uses in order to assess the impact of 

movement of nitrate in ground water 

from one area to another. Locations of 

the wells were selected without bias 

toward known or suspected problem 

areas, and all wells were constructed in 

the same way. The samples are being collected with consistent sampling methods. 

The scientists are also keeping a careful 

record of the predominant land use 

around (within a quarter-mile radius) 

and upgradient from the wells. Thirtytwo wells, generally less than 30 feet in 

depth, were sampled from June through 

August 1988. Analysis of these samples 

40 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
indicate median nitrate concentrations of 

0.1 mg/L in woodlands and 4.2 mg/L in 

agricultural areas. Again, median nitrate 

concentration in urban or built-up land 

was not assessed because only 2 of the 32 

wells are in urbanized areas. Median 

nitrate concentrations are 0.1 mg/L in 

wells downgradient from woodlands and 

3.7 mg/L in wells downgradient from 

agricultural areas. Again, these results 

are consistent with the expectation that 

nitrate concentrations in ground water 

are lower in woodlands. 

Additional broad-scale and targeted 

samples from shallow ground water are 

being collected as part of the NAWQA 

project at more than 100 sites distributed 

among major physiographic, hydrogeologic, and land-use settings in the peninsula. By broadening the sampling sites, 

the USGS will gain further insight into 

methods for investigating relations 

between nitrate and other water-quality 

constituents and land use. 

Ground-Water 

Quality in the 

United States—An 

Overview 

Ground water is one of the most important natural resources of the United States. 

Degradation of ground-water quality is an 

issue of national concern because ground 

water is a major source for public water supply, for rural domestic use, for irrigation, and 

for self-supplied industrial use. 

Information compiled by the USGS 

clearly shows that the United States has large 

amounts of potable ground water available for 

use. Even though the quality of most of the 

Nation's ground water is good, ground water 

but that can impair the usefulness of the 

water for certain purposes. 

Troublesome contamination of ground 

water falls into two basic categories related to 

the source or sources of the contamination. 

Point sources of pollution—such as wastedisposal sites, storage-tank leaks, and hazardous chemical spills—can cause high concentrations of a variety of toxic metals, organic 

chemicals, and petroleum products in ground 

water in localized areas. These types of local 

problems commonly occur in densely populated urban and industrialized areas. Contamination can also occur from nonpoint sources, 

such as agricultural activities or high-density 

domestic waste disposal (septic systems) in 

urban centers. Such contamination of ground 

water on a broad scale can enter shallow 

wells over large areas and can affect several 

counties. 

A hydraulic connection also exists 

between surface- and ground-water resources. 

About 40 percent of the average annual 

streamflow in the United States is supplied by 

ground water, and during long dry periods, 

ground-water discharge provides nearly all of 

the base flow to streams. Therefore, if a persistent pollutant gets into an aquifer, that pollutant eventually could discharge into a 

stream. 

At present, only a very small percentage 

of the total volume of potable ground water 

in the United States is contaminated from 

both point and nonpoint sources. USGS scientists caution, however, that available data 

about the occurrence of synthetic organic and 

toxic substances generally are inadequate to 

determine the full extent of ground-water 

contamination in the Nation's aquifers or to 

define trends in ground-water quality. To 

date, most information about the occurrence 

of these substances has come from the study 

100 -

97% 

of 

Percentage of ground-water use 

in the United States by major 

category (Alaska and Hawaii 

included in percentages). 

PERCENTAG E OF USE

Rural 


Population
 in some locations contains one or more naturally occurring chemical constituents or properties that exceed Federal or State drinkingwater standards or otherwise impair use, 

which include: 

53% 

of 

Total 17% of 

Population • Organisms, such as bacteria; 33% Self-Supplied 

• Metals and other substances, such as of Industries 

Irrigation 

• 

arsenic, boron, nitrate, radium, radon, 

selenium, and uranium that are toxic to 

humans, livestock, or crops in relatively 

small concentrations; and 

Chloride, dissolved solids, fluoride, hardness, hydrogen sulfide, iron, manganese, 

and sulfate that are not necessarily toxic 

0 

GROUND-WATER USE 

Water Resources Investigations 41 
of individual sites or areas where contamination has already been detected or suspected. 

Contamination in some areas may be more 

widespread than currently thought and there 

may be areas where contamination is present, 

but no studies have yet been conducted. 

Furthermore, any assessment of the 

Nation's ground-water quality must be tempered by the fact that most water-quality 

descriptions largely are based on analyses of 

inorganic chemicals. Ground-water analyses of 

toxic constituents and synthetic organic chemicals are relatively scarce, but available data 

have led to the growing realization that these 

chemicals locally have contaminated shallow 

aquifers in many parts of the country. Also, 

existing data generally have been collected to 

monitor the quality of drinking-water supplies 

or to evaluate waste sites but not to provide 

an assessment of quality of ground-water 

resources where they occur. 

Reports of contamination are likely to 

increase in the coming years as the search for 

contamination intensifies and as more sophisticated analytical techniques are used to detect 

trace amounts of toxic constituents and synthetic organic chemicals in water. The presence of organic or toxic chemicals in very 

small concentrations in ground water does not 

necessarily imply a health or environmental 

threat, but their presence does raise questions 

about the source of the chemicals and the 

possibility that concentrations might increase 

to toxic levels over time. It is on these issues 

that the USGS is concentrating much of its 

research in ground-water contamination. 

42 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Geologic Investigations 


Mission 

The basic mission of the Geologic 

Division is to evaluate the 

Nation's geologic structure and 

the geologic processes that have shaped 

it, to assess the Nation's mineral and 

energy resources, and to identify and 

investigate geologic hazards. 

• Investigations of geologic hazards 

provide information for predicting and 

delineating hazards from earthquakes 

and volcanoes and for identifying engineering problems related to ground failure hazards. 

• Regional geologic studies provide geologic maps and regional syntheses of 

detailed geologic data essential to mineral, energy, and hazard assessments. 

• Offshore geologic studies identify and 

describe the mineral and petroleum 

resources of the offshore areas of the 

United States, including the Exclusive 

Economic Zone, an area one-third larger 

than the land area of the United States. 

• Mineral resource investigations assess 

the distribution, quantity, and quality of 

the Nation's mineral resources, with particular emphasis on strategic and critical 

minerals. 

• Surveys of energy resources provide 

assessments of the Nation's coal, petroleum, uranium, and geothermal resources and enhance capabilities to 

explore for and develop new sources of 

energy. 

Highlights 

Scenario for a Warmer 

World 

By Richard Z. Poore 

Human activities have resulted in 

significant increases of carbon dioxide 

and other radiatively active (greenhouse) 

trace gases in the Earth's atmosphere. 

Scientists agree that this increase in 

greenhouse gases will result in a global 

warming over the next few decades to 

centuries. Scientists are uncertain, however, about the magnitude of the global 

warming and how the effects of the 

warming, including changes in temperature, precipitation, winds, and ocean currents, will be distributed over the Earth's 

surface. 

Determining the regional effects and 

impacts of future global warming represents major challenges to the scientific 

community. Anticipating the effects of 

climatic change is more than an intriguing scientific puzzle. Changing climate 

will affect the Nation's lands and waters 

and will cause, for example, substantial 

changes in agriculture and energy use. 

Thus, better understanding of future climatic change is important for policy 

makers at all governmental levels. 

Geologic Investigations 43 
Studies of past climates, called paleoclimates, are one important approach 

that scientists can use to estimate how 

the Earth's environment will change with 

global warming. The Earth's climate 

is dynamic and has varied naturally 

through geologic time from conditions 

that were both significantly warmer and 

colder than modern conditions. Information on past climates and how climate 

changed in the past can provide valuable 

clues about how climatic change will 

occur in the near future and what the 

effect of that change will be on the 

Earth's environment and on life on 

Earth. The climate change program of 

the U.S. Geological Survey has started a 

major study of the Pliocene (a period 

between about 5.2 and 1.6 million years 

ago) as a "scenario for a time of greater 

warmth." The Pliocene Epoch was 

selected because it is the most recent 

interval for which we have evidence for 

climates that were substantially warmer 

than modern or near-modern climates. 

The study of past intervals during 

which climates were substantially warmer 

than modern climates is useful in predicting the effects of global warming. In fact, 

recent studies of air bubbles trapped in 

ice cores from Antarctica document that 

atmospheric carbon dioxide has varied in 

the geologic past and that those variations correlate with major climate change. 

Thus, although the exact reasons for past 

climatic warmings and future global 

warming are not likely to be identical, 

past warm intervals may have been 

caused, in part, by a carbon dioxide 

greenhouse effect. Even without knowing 

the exact causes or forcing functions, the 

study of past warm intervals provides scenarios for greater warmth. These scenarios then can be used to test the ability of 

computer-generated general circulation 

models, to simulate the effects of global 

warming, and to provide an empirical 

data base to determine whether regional 

responses to warming are similar for all 

warm intervals regardless of the magnitude or cause of warming. 

Reconstruction of past climatic conditions requires two basic types of data: 

environmental conditions and geologic 

age. Past environmental conditions are 

determined primarily through paleontologic and isotopic studies, which are 

methods for reconstructing past climates. 

Most plants and animals are sensitive to 

factors such as temperature and available 

moisture. Similarly, isotopic compositions 

of fossil shells and some mineral deposits 

are, in part, controlled by temperature 

and salinity conditions in which the shells 

or deposits were formed. Thus, mapping 

past distribution of fossil remains of 

plants and animals and analyzing isotopic 

composition of fossil shells and mineral 

deposits can be used to delineate past 

climatic conditions. Other studies, including geochemistry of sediments and sedimentary structures, are also useful for 

delineating past climatic conditions. In 

addition to information on past environmental conditions, one needs to know the 

geologic age that the fossils or deposits 

represent in order to construct a history 

of climate change or to reconstruct a discrete time interval. A wide variety of 

techniques, including biochronology, isotope stratigraphy, radiometric dating, 

paleomagnetism, and tephrochronology, 

are used to date materials that are used 

in climatic studies. 

The major objective of the USGS 

effort is to construct a map summarizing 

climatic conditions during one or more 

warm intervals within the Pliocene. An 

example of this type of mapping, as 

shown in figure 1, contrasts distribution 

of assemblages of ostracodes in modern 

and Pliocene age marine sediments along 

the continental margin of the Eastern 

United States. Ostracodes are Crustacea 

that are very sensitive to environmental 

conditions such as temperature. The figure shows that, during the Pliocene, ostracode assemblages representing tropical, 

subtropical, and mild temperate climatic 

zones shifted northward along the eastern seaboard reflecting the increased 

temperature of waters along the coast. 

Sea level was also higher during the Pliocene because the total amount of water 

stored in continental glaciers was 

reduced, reflecting higher mean global 

temperature. The exact amount of sealevel rise cannot, however, be directly 

determined from figure 1 because the 

position of the Pliocene shoreline has 

been modified by local movements of the 

Earth's surface since Pliocene time. 

In addition to including intervals 

when global climate was warm, the Pliocene is attractive for study because Pliocene flora and fauna are very similar to 

44 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
MODERN MARINE CLIMATIC ZONES MIDDLE PLIOCENE MARINE CLIMATIC ZONES 

? ? 

MIDDLE PLIOCENE PRESENT DAY 

SHORELINE SHORELINE 

EXPLANATION 

Cold Temperate 

Mild Temperate 

Subtropical 

1111 Tropical 

■ Sample sites 

Figure 1. Distribution of 

temperature-dependent ostracode assemblages in modern 

(left) and Pliocene age (right) 

marine sediments along the continental margin of the Eastern 

United States. Note the subtropical climate zone in the middle 

Pliocene that extends as far as 

the New Jersey-New York border, the mild temperate climate 

zone in New England, and the 

absence of a cold temperate 

zone. 

Geologic Investigations 45 
Figure 2. Winter (February) Estimated Winter SST sea-surface temperature (SST) I° Centigrade)

during the Pliocene and modern 4 6 8 10 12 14 times. 6 I I ��i I 2.0 

2.5 — 

3.0 — 

of Pliocene surface-water temperatures. 

Figure 2 shows that sea-surface temperatures were both warmer and cooler than 

modern conditions during the interval 

between 4.6 and 2.3 million years ago. In 

some cases the SST's were more than 3 °C 

above modern. Several intervals of higher SST identified on figure 2, such as the 

interval centered around 3.0 million years 

ago, are being evaluated as candidates for 

a global climate reconstruction representing a scenario for greater warmth. Such 

glimpses into the past may well give 

scientists an excellent view into the future 

of global warming—its extent and its 

effects—on the Earth's environment. 

) Age (mil lion years ago 

3.5 — 

4.0 — 

4.5 — 

Modern 

Winter 

SST 

5.0 

modern flora and fauna; Pliocene records are widespread and easily accessible in both continental and marine settings, and most Pliocene records are relatively well preserved. All these features 

make it easier to quantify environmental 

information and to develop regional and 

even global patterns of past climatic data. 

Estimated winter sea-surface temperature (SST) in the North Atlantic Ocean 

during part of the Pliocene, as shown in 

figure 2, is an example of how paleontological studies can help to quantify conditions of past climates. The temperature 

estimates are based on analysis of the relative abundances of microfossils found in 

sediments from a deep-sea core. Knowledge of the modern distribution of the 

same or similar microfossils is used to 

translate variations in the abundances of 

microfossil taxa in the core into estimates 

The USGS study of Pliocene climates 

is an international effort. The study 

includes formal cooperation with Soviet 

scientists as part of a U.S.-U.S.S.R. Bilateral Agreement on Environmental Protection. In addition climatic researchers 

from a variety of institutes in the United 

States, Japan, the United Kingdom, and 

Canada are collaborating with USGS scientists on one or more parts of the Pliocene study. 

Dating Rocks and 

Minerals Using Lasers 

and Nuclear Reactors 

By G. Brent Dalrymple 

During the past decade, a variety of 

microanalytical techniques have been 

developed and applied to a broad spectrum of geological problems. None has 

proved more dramatic and revolutionary, 

however, than the application of a combination of lasers and nuclear reactors to 

the more precise measurement of geologic time by using the decay of naturally 

occurring potassium (40K), which has a 

half life of 1.25 billion years, to the inert 

gas argon (40Ar). 

The use of nuclear reactors for 

measuring geologic time is not new. It 

was introduced in the mid-1960's as a 

variation of conventional potassiumargon (K-Ar) dating and is known as the 

40 • r 

A _39Ar method. Potassium is found in 

most rock-forming minerals. The half-life 

46 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
of its radioactive isotope, 4°K, is such that 

measurable quantities of argon, the stable 

"daughter" product, have accumulated in 

potassium-bearing minerals of nearly all 

ages. Because of this prevalence across 

geologic time, the amounts of potassium 

and argon isotopes can be measured 

accurately. 

In the conventional method, adopted 

in the 1950's, the potassium and argon 

are measured quantitatively in separate 

procedures. The argon is measured by 

isotope dilution by using an inert-gas 

mass spectrometer. The potassium is 

measured by one of several standard 

chemical techniques, usually flame photometry. These separately acquired K 

and Ar data are then mathematically 

expressed in an equation that relates 

radioactive decay to geologic time. This 

method of dating has broader applicability than any other dating method. It has 

been and continues to be used to date 

samples of igneous, metamorphic, and 

even some sedimentary rocks—as old as 

4.5 billion years (the age of Earth) and as 

young as a few thousand years—but the 

methods are time consuming and typically require a sample of a gram or more 

in weight. 

The 40Ar-39Ar method has 

some significantly 

advantageous features . . . . 

In the newer 40Ar-39Ar method of 

K-Ar dating, the sample is irradiated 

with fast neutrons in the core of a 

nuclear research reactor, such as the 

Training Research Isotope General 

Atomic reactor (TRIGA) used by the 

USGS in Denver, Colo. The neutrons 

convert a fraction of an isotope of potassium (39K) to an isotope of argon (39Ar). 

After irradiation, the argon is extracted 

by melting the sample with induction 

heating or a resistance furnace in an 

ultra-high vacuum and analyzed, as in 

the conventional technique, by using a 

mass spectrometer. Because the ratio of 

39K to 4°K is constant in all natural materials, the 39Ar made from 39K can be 

used as a "proxy" for the 4°K, and the 

age can be calculated directly from the 

40 A / A

fir/ 39tir ratio; a separate potassium 

measurement is unnecessary. 

The 40Ar-39Ar method has some significantly advantageous features over the 

conventional method of K-Ar dating. 

First, it is more precise because the 

40 • r

A 39Ar ratio can be measured more 

precisely than the conventional 40Ar/ 40K 

ratio, which involves the quantitative 

measurement of isotopes of different elements. Second, smaller samples are 

required, usually a few tens to a few hundreds of milligrams. Third, the newer 

method is considerably faster and 

requires only an hour or two once the 

samples have been irradiated in the reactor. Finally, the argon can be released 

from the sample in increments at successive temperatures, in what is called an 

incremental heating experiment. This 

results in a series of ages known as an 

age spectrum, which contains useful 

information about the original age and 

thermal history of the sample. The incremental heating method is especially useful for samples that have been thermally 

or chemically disturbed since they first 

formed because it reveals that the sample 

has been disturbed and often allows 

recovery of the crystallization age despite 

the disturbance. 

The joining of a continuous, highpowered laser with a very sensitive mass 

spectrometer has resulted in substantial 

and important improvements in the 40Ar39Ar dating method. The USGS is the 

third group in the world to develop a 

continuous laser system (fig. 3). The first 

such system was developed by the University of Toronto; the second system 

was developed by Princeton University. 

The continuous laser system has several advantages compared to other methods of 40Ar-'9Ar dating. The most significant advantage is the ability to determine 

the age of a single crystal—as small as 

0.000001 grams for older material. This 

not only saves considerable effort in mineral separation but also permits dating of 

rare materials and of rock units that may 

contain contaminating crystals from older 

units. A second advantage is speed. 

Because the samples are small, the heating and cleanup times are short, and a 

complete age analysis typically takes 

only about 15 to 20 minutes. A third 

advantage is that the analyzing system 

Geologic Investigations 47 
Figure 3. Laser microprobe system used in 40Ar-39Ar method of K-Ar dating of rocks 

and minerals. The laser is a 5-watt continuous argon-ion laser. The laser beam is focused 

by lenses and directed by mirrors through the glass window of a small, ultra-high vacuum sample chamber where it is used to heat and melt single mineral grains. The argon 

released by the heating is exposed to the metal-alloy gutters of the cleanup system, which 

remove the reactive gases. The purified argon is then admitted to the ultra-sensitive, 

ultra-clean mass spectrometer, and the isotopic ratios—from which the age is calculated— 

are measured. The laser-fusion process is monitored by a closed circuit television camera 

mounted on a microscope. A microscopic infrared radiometer, not shown in the photograph, is used to measure the temperature of the sample during laser heating and thus 

permits incremental heating experiments to be done on the single crystals. (Photograph 

by G. Brent Dalrymple.) 

contributes less atmospheric argon (a 

contaminant in the experiment), and the 

low level of this contaminant results in 

very precise age determinations. Some 

typical single-crystal results from the 

USGS continuous laser system are shown 

in table I. 

A final advantage of the continuous 

laser system is that it is easily automated. 

In the USGS system, grain selection, 

laser operation, temperature measurement, valve operation, and video recording can all be controlled by the computer. This automation greatly increases 

the productivity of the system because 

sium feldspar handpicked from a volcanic unit in the 

Crystal weight 

Medicine Lodge Basin, western Montana 

TABLE 1. 40Ar139Ar age results on single crystals of potasCalculated age 

(grams) (million years) 

0.00089 45.99 ± 0.27 

.00083 46.03 ± .28 

.00073 46.04 ± .27 

.00056 46.19 ± .37 

the instrument can make measurements 

unattended overnight as well as during 

regular working hours. 

The continuous laser 40Ar-39Ar dating system is being used to address a 

variety of interesting and important 

problems that could not be as accurately 

addressed with previous equipment and 

methods. Among these are the timing of 

mineralization associated with ore deposits, the age of volcanic units associated 

with key faunal assemblages, and coal 

deposits—all of which can be used in 

mineral assessments and exploration for 

economic deposits. The ages of seamounts and other volcanic features in 

the Pacific can also be determined, which 

provides essential keys to the history of 

this ocean basin. 

Loss of Coastal 

Wetlands in 

Louisiana — A 

Cooperative Research 

Program to Fill in the 

Information Gaps 

By S. Jeffress Williams and 

Asbury H. Sallenger, Jr. 

Introduction 

Once considered mostly worthless 

real estate in their natural state, wetlands 

around the country have long been subjected to draining and filling for additional farmland and for urban expansion. 

Wetlands also have been used as convenient repositories for waste and trash disposal. In the past two decades, however, 

people have come to realize that, in fact, 

wetlands of all varieties are immensely 

important to both the environmental and 

the economic health of the Nation. 

Wetlands are important as habitats 

for large and varied populations of 

aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. They 

reduce the effects of flooding on developed areas, recharge ground-water 

48 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
resources, and serve as natural filters for 

reducing pollutants carried in ground 

water as well as rivers. In addition, wetlands support a wide array of recreational activities and function as spawning areas and nurseries for the majority 

of commercial and recreational fisheries, 

as well as supporting other important 

industries. 

The natural processes of wetlands 

degradation as well as wetlands destruction and alteration by public agencies and 

individuals have resulted in the loss of 

more than 50 percent of the wetlands 

that existed in the contiguous United 

States at the start of European settlement. These wetlands losses are continuing, and nowhere is the problem greater 

than in the Mississippi River delta plain 

of Louisiana. 

Louisiana accounts for an estimated 

25 percent of the vegetated wetlands and 

40 percent of the tidal wetlands in the 48 

conterminous States. Currently, it is 

undergoing the greatest amount of wetlands loss and deterioration of any State 

in the Nation. An estimated 80 percent 

of the Nation's wetlands loss has occurred in Louisiana, and by current estimates, 40 to 60 square miles are lost each 

year. These losses are the result of a 

combination of physical erosion by waves 

and currents as well as conversion from 

marsh to open water by disintegration of 

the marshlands and submergence. The 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has predicted that if these rates of loss continue, 

nearly one million additional acres of 

valuable wetlands in Louisiana will be lost 

in the next 50 years. 

The widespread loss and 

deterioration of wetlands 

in coastal Louisiana is 

due to a combination of 

natural long-term geologic 

processes and manmade 

effects on the Mississippi 

River and delta-plain 

region. 

The Louisiana Delta Plain 

The physical processes that cause 

coastal erosion and wetlands deterioration are complex, highly varied, and are 

still not particularly well defined or 

understood. The rates and magnitudes of 

future land loss, therefore, are not predictable with any high degree of confidence. Also, much debate still exists in 

the technical and scientific community 

about which of the natural and humaninduced causes are most destructive. The 

natural causes range from hurricane and 

winter-storm effects to worldwide 

changes in sea level. Human-induced 

causes include dredging of navigation 

channels and subsidence from groundwater withdrawal. 

The geologic record of the coastline 

and continental shelf of Louisiana shows 

clearly that over the past 6,000 to 8,000 

years, large shifts in the course of the 

Mississippi River have occurred at about 

1,000-year intervals. Such changes in the 

river's channel have been responsible for 

repeated cycles. These cycles are followed 

by rapid sediment compaction, subsidence, and massive erosion and wetlands 

deterioration as the river abandoned old 

channels and created new deltas. 

Because of these cyclic changes in 

the delta, sandy barrier islands form at 

the seaward ends of the delta plain. 

These barriers provide a buffer from 

ocean waves and currents and direct 

storm effects for the wetlands estuaries 

behind the barriers. With continued subsidence and a lack of coastal sediment, 

however, the barriers undergo rapid erosion, at rates up to 60 feet per year, and 

are broken into smaller, less protective 

segments when tidal inlets open during 

storms. Eventually, the coastal barriers 

are unable to maintain their geometry 

and become submerged sand bodies. 

Many examples of these former barriers 

can be seen as buried features on the 

Louisiana continental shelf. 

The Effects of Human Activities 

In addition to the natural geologic 

processes that cause coastal erosion and 

wetlands loss, human activities during the 

past century and, especially, in the past 

50 years have had dramatic effects. Since 

Geologic Investigations 49 
Canal and waterway construction 

Dredge-spoil dis 

Navigation chan 

Reductions in rive 

Levees and flood 

Extraction of subs 

Pollution 

Vessel wakes 

Oblique photograph of the 

Louisiana coast and wetlands 

showing the effects of natural 

processes and the impacts of 

human activities. (Photograph 

by S. Jeffress Williams.) 

The origin and evolutionary history of the Louisiana delta plain 

region have been tied in the recent geologic past to shifts of 

the Mississippi River channel at 

1,000-year intervals. Once the 

active delta is cut off from the 

source of river sediment, a cycle 

of coastal erosion and wetlands 

deterioration proceeds through 

the three-stage process shown. 

(Modified from Penland and 

others, 1988, Relative sea-level 

rise and delta-plain development in the Terrebonne Parish 

Region: Louisiana Geological 

Survey, Coastal Geology Technical Reports, no. 4, fig. 7, p. 10.) 

sland erosion 

I subsidence 

e in sea level 

storm effects 

ater intrusion 

riroc41 461[1t40. to)fi pagsca. ater pumping 

wild animals 

CYCLE OF COASTAL EROSION AND WETLANDS DETERIORATION 

EROSIONAL HEADLAND 


WITH FLANKING BARRIERS 
 REGRESSIVE 


ENVIRONMENTS 


MN Distributary 

IN Fresh Marsh 

Beach Ridge 

TRANSGRESSIVE 

ENVIRONMENTS 

tt oCCUPATION 

SUNIWCIL Subaerial 

Barrier Sands 

STAGE 3 

NN SHELF SHOAL 

STAGE 2 

TRANSGRESSIVE 

Subaqueous 

Barrier Sands 

BARRIER ISLAND ARC NM Sand Sheet 

III Salt Marsh 

Recurved Spit 

Shell Reef 

Tidal Channel 

the 1930's, dam building on the Missis- negative effects on the downstream wetsippi River and most of its tributaries lands. Floods that once provided sedihas, for example, reduced the volume of ments to build the wetlands no longer 

sediment being transported by the river occur. The limited sediment that is carand, therefore, available to the wetlands. ried by the river is now discharged far 

The massive levees that channel the flow out on the continental shelf, rather than 

of the Mississippi River to enhance, navi- being distributed along the coast as it was 

gation and reduce flood potential have before the levees were built. Deposition 

50 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
of silt and clay from river-borne sediments is necessary in the wetlands in 

order to counterbalance natural compaction and subsidence that occurs if the 

wetlands are not nourished and replenished by these sediments. 

Additional activities that cause wetlands loss are an extensive system of 

canals and waterways that serve as pipeline paths, access for hydrocarbon exploration and production, and waterways for 

boat traffic. Not only do dredging and 

maintaining these canals impact the wetlands, but many of them that open to the 

Gulf of Mexico enable saltwater to 

intrude brackish and freshwater 

wetlands, which accelerates their deterioration. Other causes that are suspected to 

be important, but not well documented 

as yet, involve subsidence that is associated with the extraction of hard minerals 

and fluids in the shallow subsurface. For 

example, sulfur mining over salt domes 

has resulted in localized subsidence of 

tens of feet in just several decades. 

Forced drainage, where marsh areas are 

diked and large pumps are used to draw 

down the ground water, is a widespread 

practice for agriculture and development 

that seems to contribute to soil compaction and subsidence. 

Role of USGS 

Because significant gaps still exist in 

the information available on the processes of wetlands formation and loss, continued research is needed. Various measures and recommendations have been 

proposed to mitigate the natural and 

man-made causes. Considerable controversy exists, however, over some of the 

measures such as marsh management, 

river diversions, and barrier island restoration for mitigation and wetlands restoration. Much of the debate has to do with 

uncertainties in predicting the long-term 

success of these measures, all of which 

require large expenditures of time and 

money to design, construct, and then 

maintain. 

The USGS is conducting research to 

provide the basic information needed to 

gain an improved understanding of the 

geologic processes causing coastal erosion 

and deterioration of wetlands environments. The USGS has two ongoing studies in Louisiana that focus on coastal erosion and wetlands loss. A cooperative 

effort with the Louisiana Geological Survey over the past four years has demonstrated the important role that the coastal 

barrier islands play in providing natural 

protection to bays, estuaries, and wetlands from ocean waves and surge flooding and from saltwater intrusion accompanying storms. A second study, which 

was started in late 1988 in cooperation 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and Louisiana State agencies, is the Louisiana Wetlands Loss Study. This 5-year 

investigation is designed to assess the 

regional extent of wetlands loss and to 

provide the information base needed to 

better define the critical physical processes affecting wetlands environments. 

These wetlands studies are being carried out through field research by USGS 

scientists and through contracts and 

cooperative agreements with scientists at 

Louisiana State University, the Louisiana 

Geological Survey, and private consultants. To fill the information gaps, the 

current USGS study is focused on: 

• Mapping and interpreting the physical changes that have taken place along 

the Louisiana barrier coast and in the 

wetlands over the past several thousand 

years and particularly during the past 

100 years. 

• Developing a comprehensive coastal 

data base and using these data in a network of computer-based geographic 

information systems available in Federal, 

State, and local agencies and private 

companies. 

• Comparing the sediment-deficient 

Terrebonne basin in the Louisiana delta 

plain with the sediment-rich Atchafalaya 

basin. These comparative investigations 

will focus on sediment compaction, sealevel rise, and land subsidence; effects of 

meteorological events such as hurricanes; 

dispersal of fine-grained sediments; movement of fresh- and saline water; processes of physical erosion; and conditions 

required for soils to develop in wetlands. 

• Assessing the potential effectiveness 

of small-scale freshwater diversions from 

the Mississippi River as a mitigation 

measure for wetlands deterioration. 

All of these studies will provide significant information on coastal wetlands 

and will enhance information that is 

Geologic Investigations 51 
currently incomplete, unavailable, or 

uncertain. Filling these information gaps 

is a significant step towards the President's stated goal of no net loss of wetlands. In turn, this information, which is 

provided to the technical community as 

well as Federal, State, and local coastal 

zone managers, can then be used to better manage our coastal resources and 

protect and preserve valuable wetlands. 

Assessing Pollutant 

Transport and 

Accumulation in the 

Coastal Ocean—A Pilot 

Study in Boston 

Harbor and 

Massachusetts Bay 

By Michael H. Bothner and 

Bradford Butman 

The major objective of a multidisciplinary study of Boston Harbor and 

Massachusetts Bay is to provide a regional basinwide perspective of sediment and contaminant transport. The 

Boston area was selected for a pilot study 

because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated the 

harbor as one of the most contaminated 

in the United States, because a comprehensive plan to cleanup the harbor is 

presently being implemented, and 

because the geometry, topography and 

sediment distribution provide a variety of 

sedimentary environments for study. The 

$6 billion cleanup effort, to be completed 

by the year 2000, includes the elimination of ocean discharge of sewage sludge, 

upgrading sewage treatment from primary to secondary (allowing for partial 

detoxification of the sludge), and the 

construction of a new ocean outfall 

approximately 8 miles seaward of the 

harbor mouth. 

To assist in this cleanup effort, a 

clear need exists for basic scientific information that the USGS can provide concerning sediment distributions and pollutant transport processes in this coastal 

environment to aid in management and 

engineering decisions. This need exists in 

many coastal areas adjacent to major 

population centers where wastes are 

often discharged into the ocean, which is 

also used for recreation, fishing, and 

transportation. 

The USGS study to address contaminant transport in Boston Harbor and 

Massachusetts Bay, called P-TRACE (Pollutant Transport and Accumulation in 

Coastal Embayments), uses the tools and 

disciplines of marine geology to map the 

distribution of sediment types, determine 

the present levels of chemical contaminants in the sediments, monitor water 

currents and sediment transport events, 

measure physical characteristics of bottom sediments, and estimate rates of sediment accumulation and mixing. The 

focus on sediments capitalizes on the fact 

that sediments in the aquatic environment have chemically active surfaces that 

adsorb a wide variety of dissolved pollutants. A quantitative understanding of 

sediment distributions and transport 

mechanisms contributes to the ability to 

predict the fate and effects of these pollutants. Knowing the location and areal 

extent of the different sediment types, 

bedrock outcrops, and bedforms generated by the action of ocean currents is 

also vital in designing an effective monitoring program. Such a monitoring program is necessary to assess the environmental impacts of ocean outfalls and is 

critical for selecting the locations for the 

instruments from which long-term current and sediment-transport measurements can be made. 

A first stage in the pilot study was to 

conduct geophysical surveys of Boston 

Harbor and selected regions in Massachusetts Bay. Information from these 

surveys typically include sidescan-sonar, 

high-resolution seismic-reflection, and 

bathymetric data. The preliminary maps 

that have been generated from these data 

show the morphology and texture of the 

sea floor as well as the thickness of the 

sediments. Inferred areas of erosion and 

of sediment-pollutant accumulation have 

been identified that will aid significantly 

in the design of subsequent topical 

studies. 

52 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
observations are also essential to document and evaluate the importance of 

infrequent or catastrophic events, such as 

floods or strong storms, on sediment 

transport and coastal circulation. 

Currents and sediments that had 

been resuspended were measured in 

three locations in western Massachusetts 

Bay (depth range 72-216 feet) during the 

winter and spring of 1987. The nearbottom observations were made by means 

of an instrumented tripod (fig. 4). Currents, light transmission, and temperature were also measured at middepth 

and near the sea surface using moorings 

next to the tripods. Sediment traps were 

used to collect material suspended in the 

water column. 

The mean current flow at station A 

was toward shore at all levels of the water 

column (fig. 5). This onshore flow suggests local recirculation in the region 

south of Nahant and that discharge of 

treated effluent in this location would be 

unwise because it would be transported 

toward the shore. The near-bottom 

observations showed resuspension of the 

surficial sediments during winter storms. 

The most severe storms resuspended sediments at each of the mooring locations, 

but the storms of less intensity resuspended material at only the two 

shallower sites (A and B, fig. 5). These 

data suggest that accumulation of finegrained sediment may occur during the 

summer months when storms are infrequent but that the same sediments may 

then be resuspended and transported 

toward deeper water or protected 

inshore areas during winter storms. 

The 1987 current measurements 

coincided with the largest April discharge 

on record from the Merrimack River, 

located just north of the study area. Seasurface temperature maps obtained from 

satellite observations were examined to 

aid in the interpretation of the current 

measurements; the images showed a 

large surface plume extending southward 

from the Merrimack River and into Massachusetts Bay. A strong northwestward 

flow was observed that was associated 

with the western edge of the plume (fig. 

6). These observations show the important influence of nonlocal forcing mechanisms, such as freshwater inflow from 

inland rivers, on circulation and sediment 

transport in Massachusetts Bay. These 

observations emphasize the need for 

expanding these studies to gain a 

broader regional perspective on what 

those mechanisms are and what their 

effects might be. Long-term synoptic 

42° 30' 

42° 20 

Figure 4. USGS bottom tripod 

system for long-term studies of 

currents and sediment transport. The instrument measures 

current, temperature, light 

transmission, and pressure, and 

it also photographs the sea bottom at selected intervals. Sediment traps obtain samples of 

sediment suspended in the water column. (Photograph by 

Bradford Butman.) 

Figure 5. Western area of Massachusetts Bay showing mean 

flow at three locations (A, B, 

and C) measured during the 

winter and spring of 1987. Although weak, the observations 

are consistent with a mean 

shore-parallel flow near the surface and a weak net flow near 

the bottom. Note the onshore 

flow observed at station A south 

of Nahant at all instrument 

depths. 

71° 6 

70° 50' 70° 40' 

MEAN FLOW yo AT TRIPOD 


LOCATIONS MARBLEHEAD 


February -April 


1987 


NIAHANT 

A 

0 DEER IS. 

0 

N 

Contours in meters 

06 10Km laaos11.11,1 


FLOW LEGEND 

4. Inferred surface 

current pattern 

"' 1,-' Near-surface current 

<,,,,,.. c6 .11- — Current 7 m above

sea floor 

'0 • • • Current 1 m above 

sea floor 

9 1 cm/s 1 

MEAN CURRENT FLOW 


WINTER DEPLOYMENT 1987 


Geologic Investigations 53 
42° 30' 

42' 

Figure 6. Sea-surface temperature derived from satellite observations showing plume of 

warmer water extending southward into Massachusetts Bay 

from the Merrimack River. 

Blue arrows show inferred 

flow; black arrows show nearsurface flow measured by current meters at stations A, B and 

C. Note the strong northwestward flow associated with the 

western side of the river plume. 

Red arrow indicates the mouth 

of the Merrimack River. (Courtesy of University of Rhode 

Island.) 

70° A number of radioactive isotopes 

have been analyzed in this study in order 

A 11 April 0320 EST to determine the rates of sediment accuPLUME BOUNDARY mulation, the rates of sediment mixing 

INFERRED FLOW 1+ 

OBSERVED FLOW -.•—• 

0 20cm/s ? p 

The geochemical and geotechnical 

studies within the cooperative program 

typically examine sediment characteristics 

that have developed over a time frame of 

years to centuries. Heavy metals (chromium, copper, lead, zinc, and so on) are 

found in significantly higher concentrations in surface sediments of the harbor 

in comparison with those in sediments 

deposited before the industrial revolution. The critical question to address is 

whether or not these contaminated sediments will remain as a long-term source 

of pollution after the principal sources 

are reduced or eliminated. Measurements 

of geotechnical properties are used to 

characterize the sediments at different 

locations to determine their suitability for 

use as fill material and as foundations for 

structures. 

(bioturbation), and the potential for pollutant accumulation. Lead-210, a sediment reactive isotope that behaves like 

many contaminants in the marine environment, can be used as a contaminant 

tracer. Measurements of lead-210 concentrations in a number of cores taken 

from undisturbed sediments from Boston 

Harbor and Massachusetts Bay show 

excess lead-210, between 0.6 and 2.3 

times the amount predicted from atmospheric and seawater sources. In areas 

where increased accumulation of lead210 has occurred, increased accumulation of other contaminants would be 

The critical question to 

address is whether or 

not these contaminated 

sediments will remain 

as a long-term source 

of pollution . . . . 

expected. Other isotopes such as carbon14, thorium-234, and plutonium contribute to our understanding of where sediments are actively accumulating. Areas 

identified to look at sediment accumulations include Stellwagen basin offshore 

and protected areas of the harbor 

inshore. These areas of accumulation will 

be monitored to evaluate the long-term 

environmental effects of the new ocean 

outfall. 

A detailed sidescan-sonar survey 

over 31 square miles in Massachusetts 

Bay was conducted in April 1989 on the 

RV Anderson, a research vessel provided 

by the EPA. The sidescan imagery 

showed a complex pattern of sediment 

texture and roughness. A preliminary 

map, drawn at sea as the sidescan data 

were generated, outlined zones based on 

different acoustic signatures. Each zone 

was interpreted as representing different 

sediment types: areas of coarse gravel 

and (or) boulders, rippled sand, and 

smooth, fine-grained sediment. These 

interpretations were confirmed by photo54 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
graphing and sampling target locations 

identified aboard ship. 

The preliminary map has been of 

use to State officials who are charged 

with deciding the location of the outfall 

for Boston's treated sewage effluent. An 

unexpected discovery made during the 

sidescan-sonar mapping operation was 

the existence of a previously uncharted 

shipwreck, approximately 100 feet long, 

at the edge of the survey area. A digital 

mosaic of the sidescan sonar data is currently being developed; once completed 

the digital data can be merged with other 

data sets, such as texture, bathymetry, or 

biological habitats, to provide a concise 

description of the sea floor. 

The USGS study in coastal Massachusetts is closely coordinated with other 

agencies and research organizations 

through the Massachusetts Bay's Management Committee. USGS participates on 

this committee along with representatives 

from each of the Federal and State agencies that has an interest in the coastal 

environment of Massachusetts. The committee, which is spending $1.6 million for 

a carefully coordinated research program 

through 1991, has applied to EPA to 

include Massachusetts Bay/Cape Cod Bay 

into the National Bays Program. 

The USGS has just concluded a 

Cooperative Agreement with the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority 

(MWRA), the independent State agency 

that provides water and sewer service 

to the Boston Metropolitan area, to establish a long-term current and sedimenttransport monitoring station in western 

Massachusetts Bay near the proposed site 

of the new ocean outfall. This station will 

provide the first long-term measurements 

in Massachusetts Bay, and the observations will be used to assess the importance of seasonal variability and infrequent catastrophic events on sediment 

transport. New conditional sampling 

instrumentation will be developed to collect samples of suspended material at the 

height of major storms. This new equipment will improve estimates of the concentration and composition of suspended 

matter during storms when resuspension 

and transport of bottom sediments (and 

any associated contaminants) may be 

most significant and when sampling from 

a surface ship is impossible. 

Analyzing Nevada's 

Undiscovered 

Resources 

By Donald A. Singer and 

Robert C. Jachens 

Nevada was the Nation's largest silver producer 120 years ago. Today, in 

spite of the fact that over 50 percent of 

Nevada's 110,500-square-mile surface is 

covered with what appears to be barren 

rocks and gravels, the State is the largest 

gold producer. Because the majority of 

metal-bearing mineral deposits exposed 

at the surface are believed to have already been found, a prime concern of a 

joint project of the USGS and Nevada 

Bureau of Mines and Geology has been 

to disclose the nature of and the depth to 

possible mineral deposits under this 

apparently barren cover. 

The overall goal of the team of geologists, geophysicists, and geochemists is 

to provide an analysis of Nevada's mineral resources that can be used to help 

plan economic development, consider 

alternate uses of land, plan exploration, 

and estimate the availability of minerals 

under different conditions. Because of 

the extent to which potential mineral 

resources are covered, an important condition affecting the value of minerals in 

Nevada is the depth at which the deposits 

are located. Depth affects the chances of 

discovery, because deeper deposits are 

much more difficult and, therefore, more 

costly to discover; depth affects economic 

potential, because deeper deposits are 

significantly more costly to mine. The 

cooperative analysis currently underway 

is limited to the deposits and their permissive geologic environments that occur 

within the upper 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) 

of the Earth's crust. 

A three-part resource assessment 

process is used because of its ability to 

respond to each of the diverse problems 

mentioned above and to use a variety of 

information and resource assessment 

methods. In this three-part assessment 

process (1) areas are delineated according to the types of deposits their geology 

will permit; (2) grade-tonnage models 

Geologic Investigations 55 
are used to estimate the amount of metal 

and some characteristics of ore; and, (3) 

estimates are made of the number of 

deposits of each type in the delineated 

areas. 

Areas or domains are delineated that 

may contain particular deposit types as 

inferred by analogy with deposits in similar geologic settings elsewhere. In order 

to construct the boundaries of these 

areas, it is necessary to have a geologic 

map, and it is desirable to have accompanying mineral occurrence, geophysical, 

exploration, and geochemical information. This information must be integrated Figure 7. Thickness of Ceno­ with information about the geologic envi­ zoic cover, in kilometers, based ronment of different types of mineral on an analysis of regional gravity data in Nevada. deposits to delineate the area. The key120° 114° 

KM 

0 

3 

5 

36° 

114° 

stone to combining all of this diverse 

information is the use of a mineral 

deposit model. The USGS has published 

such deposit models (USGS Bulletin 

1693), which allow linkage of deposit 

types to geologic environments. 

In order to make the connection of 

deposit type to geologic environment, it 

is necessary to recognize and map the 

relevant geologic settings in Nevada. This 

task is the primary purpose of producing 

maps that address geology, gravity field, 

magnetic field, pre-Tertiary geology 

(older than 63 million years), Tertiary 

geology (63 million to 2 million years 

old), ages of young volcanic deposits, 

intrusive rocks, neotectonics, known mineral deposits, and mineral resources. 

Each of the maps is being prepared in 

digital form so that hypotheses can be 

quickly tested, derivative maps generated 

(fig. 7), and the information disseminated to other researchers. 

The geologic map of the State being 

used in this analysis is modified from 

that published in 1978 in that rock units 

are grouped to represent geologic environments that would permit the formation of different types of mineral deposits. It also includes new information on 

the ages of igneous rocks. Because the 

geologic map represents the geology that 

is exposed and therefore best known, it is 

the foundation for most of the other 

studies. 

Analysis of regional gravity data is 

being used to estimate the thickness of 

younger rocks that have most recently 

been deposited. From these gravity data, 

the scientists were able to produce 

another gravity map from which the 

gravity components of thick deposits of 

young rock and unconsolidated sediments have been removed. This map 

is used to help identify the rock types of 

the concealed basement layer, to delineate major crustal structures and boundaries, and to identify concealed plutons 

(intrusions of igneous rocks) and calderas 

(large basin-shaped volcanic depressions), 

all of which can reflect geologic environments permissive for the formation of 

certain types of mineral deposits. 

The analysis of magnetic data focuses on the distribution of near-surface 

magnetic sources in order to delineate 

bodies of shallowly buried magnetic 

rock. Typically these are Tertiary and 

56 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Quaternary (2 million to 10,000 

years old) volcanic rocks. The threedimensional information provided by the 

analysis affects the mineral resource 

assessment in that certain types of mineral deposits, such as porphyry and skarn 

copper deposits and platinum, are associated with magnetic rocks. 

Many kinds of mineral deposits owe 

their origin to intrusive igneous rocks. 

Knowledge of where these plutonic rocks 

occur is critical in identifying where these 

types of deposits could exist. A new geophysical tool, which relies primarily on 

magnetic data, is used to locate unexposed plutonic rocks. 

In order to explicitly consider depth 

in this study, we must deal with volumes 

of rock and must combine the rock units 

so that they represent consistent geologic 

environments. A new type of geologic 

map is required to portray these rock 

groups because a number of different 

geologic environments may overlap in 

the 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) beneath any 

given locality on the surface. The complexity of display requires two different 

maps. The first map of the pre-Tertiary 

geology shows older rocks that may host 

mineral deposits related to later igneous 

activity or may contain mineral deposits 

that formed at the same time as the 

rocks. The second map, Tertiary geology 

of Nevada, concentrates on the young 

igneous rocks and related calderas that 

are closely related to many of the mineral 

deposits of Nevada. 

Ages of young volcanic rocks when 

compared with the ages of different 

kinds of mineral deposits provide key 

information about the development and 

nature of the mineral deposits and also 

provide new light on the geologic development of Nevada. 

Geologic, geomorphic, geophysical, 

and well-log data are being analyzed to 

infer the approximate subsurface geometry of fault-bounded basins in Nevada. 

By analyzing this more recent tectonic 

activity, scientists can better determine 

the depth of environments permissive for 

older deposits and about the spatial distributions of younger rocks that may be 

associated with the mineral deposits 

formed at shallow depths, possibly near 

faults related to the basins. 

Types of mineral deposits and occurrences that have already been found in 

120° 114° 

42° 

EXPLANATION 

Epithermal deposits 

Sediment-hosted gold 

specific geologic environments in Nevada 

not only confirm that the environments 

are permissive for the same deposit 

types, but they also suggest the possibility 

of genetically related deposit types. For 

the first time, approximately 1,600 mineral deposits and occurrences have been 

classified by deposit type. Maps of the 

locations of Cenozoic (63 million to 

10,000 years old) deposits show a 

remarkable pattern in which volcanichosted epithermal deposits of gold, silver, 

mercury, and manganese in Nevada are 

distributed in a C-shaped pattern (fig. 8) 

with the interior of the C generally devoid of these deposit types, despite the 

widespread distribution of volcanic rocks. 

Sediment-hosted gold deposits, such as 

the Carlin deposit, are restricted (with 

minor overlap) to the interior of the C. 

Because the sediment-hosted gold deposits originally formed at a deeper level in 

the crust, are related to different types of 

faults, and were formed earlier than the 

epithermal deposits, important new 

information about the geologic evolution 

of Nevada and about where different 

types of deposits might exist has been 

revealed. 

As noted above, specific geologic 

environments suggest the possibility of 

certain types of mineral deposits. The 

converse is also true; the distribution of 

different types of known mineral deposits suggest the presence of geologic 

Figure 8. Distribution of epithermal mineral deposits 

(formed at relatively shallow 

depths by circulation of hot fluids) and of sediment-hosted 

gold deposits in Nevada. 

Geologic Investigations 57 
environments that may not be evident 

from existing geologic maps. The 

mineral-resource analysis portion of this 

project builds on each of the other sections and, like the other sections, contains 

new results that will require many geoscientists to reexamine their existing concepts of mineral resources in Nevada. 

Each of the researchers is addressing 

part of the overall problem of analyzing 

and predicting Nevada's mineral resources. The interdisciplinary nature of 

the research for this cooperative venture 

has amplified and reinforced each part 

of the project and has led to products 

not otherwise obtainable. 

Uranium in the 

United States 

By Joseph S. Duval 

Background 

Uranium-238 is a radioactive element that occurs naturally in trace 

amounts in all types of rocks and soils. 

Uranium is chemically mobile in oxidizing environments and many of the rockforming and surface processes result in 

uranium concentrations that are characteristic of a particular rock or soil. For 

this reason, a map of the uranium distribution in rocks and soils can provide 

information useful to understanding geologic and soil formation processes. Uranium is itself of interest as a fuel for 

nuclear energy, but because it is often 

associated with other elements, it also 

can be useful in mineral exploration 

applications. 

The USGS, in cooperation with the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

has compiled aerial gamma-ray data 

obtained during the National Uranium 

Resource Evaluation (NURE) Program 

sponsored by the U.S. Department of 

Energy to create a map showing surface 

concentrations of uranium-238 for the 

conterminous United States. 

Health Hazards and Uranium 

Concentrations 

Because uranium produces radioactive decay products, its presence in the 

environment in various forms presents 

health hazards. Radon-222 in indoor air, 

for example, is known, under certain 

conditions and at certain exposure levels, 

to cause lung cancer. Radium-226 in 

water supplies has been shown to cause 

other forms of cancer. These health risks 

underscore the need to have the best 

possible picture of where uranium occurs 

in the geologic environment. 

The data on the map showing uranium distribution for the conterminous 

United States are grouped into intervals 

of 0.5 parts per million (ppm) equivalent 

uranium (eU). The term "equivalent" is 

used because radioactive disequilibrium 

can occur in the uranium decay series, 

and the gamma-ray measurement is not a 

direct measure of the uranium. Where 

blank areas exist on the map, no data are 

available. 

States and regions having large areas 

of low values (less than 1.5 ppm eU) are 

Oregon, western Washington, northern 

California, northwestern Nebraska, 

northern Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin, 

Minnesota, Florida, and the outer coastal 

plains of New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

and Georgia. In the Western States, these 

low values generally occur in areas 

underlain by igneous rocks having low 

original uranium content. In the coastal 

areas of the Southern and Eastern States, 

the low values occur in areas underlain 

by marine sands of low uranium content. 

In the North-Central States, the low values are caused by high soil moisture that 

attenuates the gamma-ray signal. 

The higher concentrations of uranium are associated with granites, granitic metamorphic rocks, black shales, 

phosphatic rocks, and Tertiary rhyolites 

(between 63 and 2 million years old). 

Most of the granites and granitic metamorphic rocks are distributed in the 

Western and Eastern States with only a 

few occurrences in the Central States. 

Some of the granites having the highest 

uranium concentrations are the Conway 

granite in New England and the Silver 

Plume granites in Colorado. Phosphatic 

rocks in Alabama, Mississippi, and Flor58 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
127. 123' 119. 115. 111• 107' 103' 99. 95. 91. 87. 83• 79. 75. 71• 67' 

47. 

43. 

39. 

35. 

31• 

27' 

23' 

119' 115. 11, 107' 103. 

O 100 200 KM 

Emizek.16111 

F 9 O 80 160 MILES 

ida have elevated uranium concentrations. Tertiary rhyolites in southwestern 

New Mexico, western Utah, Nevada, Arizona, southwestern California, Idaho, 

and Wyoming also have high uranium 

concentrations. Some of the more radioactive black shales occur in Utah, Ohio, 

and Kentucky. 

The distribution patterns seen in 

Ohio and Kentucky provide information 

relevant to soil formation processes associated with glaciers. In central Ohio, the 

uranium is widely dispersed as a result of 

glacial processes, but, below the glacial 

boundary in Kentucky and southern 

Ohio, the elevated uranium values are 

more localized and occur in areas underlain by the Devonian black shales. Some 

of these areas have concentrations 

greater than 5.0 ppm eU. Similar processes have affected the uranium distribution in the New England States. In 

Maine, the areas of highest uranium concentrations are underlain by rocks described as two-mica granites. The areas to 

the south and east of the granitic 

99• 95. 91' 87• 

intrusions also have elevated uranium 

concentrations (greater than 2.5 ppm eU) 

and presumably the surface soils (of 

which the concentrations are being measured by the gamma-ray data) contain 

materials displaced by glacial scour from 

the granitic rocks. Other locally higher 

uranium concentrations in Maine occur 

along the Atlantic Coast and in northcentral Maine and are also related to twomica granites. 

Radon Potential 

Uranium maps have been especially 

useful in understanding the source and 

presence of indoor radon. Because an 

aerial gamma-ray system is measuring the 

gamma-ray flux from the decay of 

Bismuth-214 (a radon-222 decay product) in the ground, the aerial gamma-ray 

data provide estimates of the concentrations of radon-222 in the soil gas. The 

USGS has conducted field studies in 

Montgomery County, Md., of the appar47. 

43. 

39. 

35' 

31' 

27' 

83' 79. 75. 

O 100 200 KM 

IsizostseEd pisalpsimaps, 

O 80 160 MILES 

Distribution of uranium-238 in 

the conterminous United States 

(ppm, parts per million; eU, 

equivalent uranium). 

Geologic Investigations 59 
. . . surface gamma-ray 


data can be used 


to estimate the radon 


in the soil gas. 


ent surface concentrations of uranium in 

the soils by using gamma-ray measurements and of radon in the soil gas. The 

results indicate that the surface gammaray data can be used to estimate the 

radon in the soil gas. Other studies compared the average indoor radon in counties in New Jersey to the average apparent surface concentrations of radium [1 

picocuries per gram (pCi/g) radium = 

0.333 ppm eU], and the results indicate 

that the average radium concentrations 

can be used to estimate the average 

indoor radon levels in New Jersey. Average indoor radon levels for houses in 

townships in Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho were also compared to surface 

concentrations of radium. The results of 

this study also suggest a predictive relation. Scientists caution, however, that 

townships underlain by highly permeable soils (soils through which water percolates greater than 6 inches per hour) 

constitute a distinct subset compared to 

townships having less permeable soils. 

Highly permeable soils apparently 

increased the average indoor radon for 

a given concentration of radium by about 

a factor of 6. 

All of the above results indicate that 

the map of the surface concentrations of 

uranium can be used to estimate average 

indoor radon levels, but only in a relative 

sense. In other words, an area in a particular region of the country having 4 

ppm eU should result in higher average 

indoor radon levels than another area in 

the same region having 2 ppm eU. But 

because of differences in soil conditions, 

climate, and house construction, 4 ppm 

eU in New Jersey would not be expected 

to result in the same average indoor 

radon levels as 4 ppm eU in Colorado. 

Areas having inherently permeable soils 

should tend to have higher average 

indoor radon levels than areas having 

less permeable soils if the areas have similar uranium concentrations. 

The compilation of the NURE aerial 

gamma-ray data to produce a map of the 

surface concentrations of uranium for 

the conterminous United States has resulted in a reasonably accurate representation of the distribution of uranium 

in the surface rocks and soils, and general agreement exists between mapped 

geology and the patterns seen in the uranium distribution. Because of the relation 

between uranium and radon, this map is 

also useful as a tool for estimating indoor 

radon levels. This map, however, cannot 

be used to directly estimate the radon 

levels because of the effects of permeability, housing construction, and differences 

in soil weathering profiles. With this map 

as a starting point, local and regional 

planners and managers have an important tool to use in identifying areas that 

warrant additional study to determine 

the radon potential of a specific area. 

This map also should prove useful for 

understanding other geologic, geochemical, and soil formation processes. 

60 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
National Mapping Program 


Mission 

The primary mission of the 

National Mapping Division is to 

provide accurate and up-to-date 

basic cartographic information for the 

United States in forms that can be readily 

applied to present-day problems. Maps, 

aerial photographs, satellite images, digital data, and geodetic control information 

represent some of the cartographic products available. Topographic maps at various scales, which illustrate detailed and 

precisely referenced information about 

natural and manmade features on the 

Earth's surface, continue to be important 

products. These maps provide basic cartographic information that is needed by 

most Federal, State, and local government agencies in dealing with key issues 

ranging from satisfying energy demands 

to conserving natural resources, from 

identifying environmental problems to 

developing acceptable solutions, and 

from locating commercial facilities to 

designing public works. 

In addition to maps, cartographic 

data in computer-readable form are 

becoming increasingly important. These 

data are used in computer-based resource and geographic information systems to evaluate alternative management 

plans and to study the effects of different 

policies. 

Highlights 

Mapping 

Modernization 

By Eugene C. Napier, Ernest B. 

Brunson, and K. Lea Ginnodo 

When the U.S. Geological Survey 

was established in 1879, topographic 

mapping was conducted as an adjunct to 

geologic studies. Soon, topographic maps 

were recognized as having intrinsic value 

as well as value for many other applications. From this beginning, the concept 

of preparing standard topographic maps 

for multipurpose use was conceived, and 

the first standard quadrangle map was 

completed in 1881. Since that time, the 

USGS's topographic mapping program 

has undergone several transitions as 

users' needs for more detailed map information increased and as mapping procedures and technology evolved. The current transition began in 1979 when the 

USGS formally initiated the Digital Cartography Program. 

The widespread use of computers 

and associated technology has generated 

new and increasing demands for map 

National Mapping Program 61 
Figure 1. Map revision will be a 

major focus of the National 

Mapping Division's activities for 

the next decade. The need to 

keep map information current is 

clearly seen in the dramatic 

changes shown in these examples of an area in New Jersey. 

In the 1989 map, note the expanded road system and cloverleaf interchange, the large shopping mall, and the extensive 

residential development (gray 

area). 

TOMS RIVER, N. J. .7:'!,. 

39074-H2-TF-024 

1989 

1)MA 6163 I NW-SERIES I/822 ill 

information in computer-compatible 

form. Since 1979, user requirements for 

accurate and current cartographic data in 

both digital and graphic forms have 

accelerated beyond the capacity of the 

National Mapping Division to produce 

them. 

. . .The USGS has 

undertaken an extensive 

mapping modernization 

effort . . . . 

To respond to this increasing demand, the USGS has undertaken an 

extensive mapping modernization effort 

that includes major technical and programmatic transitions. The objective of 

this modernization effort is to develop 

and implement advanced digital cartographic systems and production procedures in the USGS's cartographic production centers by the mid-1990's. This 

modernization will make it easier to 

revise maps more frequently and to prepare and maintain more up-to-date cartographic products. 

TOMS RIVER, N. J, 

NW/4 TOMS RIVER IS. QUADRANGLE 


N3952.5-W7407.5/7.5 


1953 


PHOTOREVISED 1970 


AMS 6163 I NW-SERIES V822 


Tasks underway to accomplish this 

ambitious goal include expanding and 

improving mass digitizing capabilities; 

modifying data structures to support 

increased content and access requirements; developing digital revision capability; developing digital productgeneration capabilities for standard, 

derivative, and digital products; improving quality control; and supporting 

advanced spatial analysis and applications. When these tasks are completed 

and the digital cartographic systems are 

fully operational in the mid-1990's, the 

USGS will be able to meet increasing 

requirements to keep current the 

Nation's 57,000-plus primary-scale maps 

(fig. 1). 

A Primary Mapping Economic Analysis, completed in fiscal year, 1989, showed 

that there are significant economic benefits to computer-based map revision. Further, the analysis showed that the current 

target of revising maps on a 10-year cycle 

is conservative and that there would be 

greater benefits if the revision cycles 

were shorter. 

The mapping modernization effort 

represents a substantial and timely program change in the USGS. It appropriately takes advantage of state-of-the-art 

mapping technology and will result in a 

highly responsive digital cartographic 

62 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
NATURAL FEEDBACK 

Environmental 

Variables: 

Climate 

Atmospheric 

chemistry 

Precipitation 

chemistry 

Botanic cover 

etc. 

LAND Natural 

Processes: 

Climate and 

hydrologic 

systems 

Biogeochemical 

dynamics 

Ecosystem 

dynamics 

Solid-earth 

processes 

Changing 

Characteristics: 

10. 

Erosion 

Botanic cover 

Desertification 

Soil development 

A Permanent 

Characteristics: 

Geology 

Topography Human Actions Effects on Humans - 

J 

SOCIOECONOMIC FEEDBACK 

production system. Attaining this goal of 

modernizing the National Mapping Program will enhance the USGS's ability to 

meet national requirements for up-todate multipurpose cartographic data and 

map products. 

The concerns of both 

scientists and policymakers 

are now focused on the 

potential for long-term 

changes. . . . 

Geographic 

Information 

Contributes to Studies 

of Global Change 

By Raymond D. Watts 

The summer of 1988 was hot and 

dry. Farmers in the northern Great 

Plains endured massive crop failures, and 

Washington, D.C., sweltered in the hottest summer since the 1930's. Political 

attention was focused on concerns about 

the effects of human alteration of the 

global environment, including its climate. 

In congressional testimony, one scientist expressed "99 percent confidence" 

that the weather of 1988 was attributable 

to enhanced greenhouse heating of the 

atmosphere—a result of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations 

from the burning of fossil fuels and 

deforestation. Most scientists, however, 

would not agree that such a direct connection has been established. In spite of 

great progress, current understanding of 

many aspects of climatic behavior remains rudimentary. 

Today's computer models of climate 

are just beginning to incorporate realistic 

oceanic behavior, and their descriptions 

of land-atmosphere interactions are woefully inadequate. On short time scales 

(days to weeks), the atmosphere, oceans, 

and biosphere are relatively independent. 

On slightly longer time scales (months, 

seasons, years), the atmosphere, oceans, 

and biosphere affect each other, but 

feedbacks are relatively unimportant. On 

yet longer time scales (years, decades, 

centuries), all parts of the Earth's environmental system interact and affect each 

other—but in ways that scientists do not 

understand qualitatively, much less quantitatively. The concerns of both scientists 

and policymakers are now focused on the 

potential for long-term changes that will 

span decades or centuries and involve the 

entire, tightly coupled, land-oceanatmosphere global environmental system. 

The land component participates in 

global environmental processes in many 

ways. It is a new challenge to geographers and cartographers to describe and 

to measure the role that land plays in 

order to provide quantitative information 

that is useful in the development of computer models of the global environment. 

One of the major challenges to scientists 

who study global change is to identify the 

relative roles of human and natural processes and the ways that environmental 

change, once begun, feeds back through 

natural and human behavior to effect 

further change. 

The USGS is undertaking studies of 

the land relationships indicated by red 

lines in figure 2. The central question of 

these studies is how to provide descriptions of land characteristics that will serve 

Figure 2. Relationships of human activities and natural processes acting on the land, effects 

of land changes on natural 

processes and on humans, and 

feedbacks into further land 

change. The relationships represented by red lines are to be examined by the National Mapping Division for application to 

interdisciplinary global studies. 

National Mapping Program 63 
the needs of scientists who study global 

environmental change. Ecologists, meteorologists, atmospheric chemists, and scientists from numerous other fields need 

information about topography, geology, 

botanic cover (including seasonal variations), soils and soil development, erosion, and other land characteristics. Global modeling studies require information 

different from that needed for local 

process studies. For geographers, cartographers, and others who build essential 

data bases, an understanding of resolution and accuracy requirements is a prerequisite for an effective contribution 

to the interdisciplinary global research 

program. 

Computer models of environmental 

processes are a distillation of current scientific knowledge. They are quantitative 

by nature and design; they describe, for 

example, reservoirs, flows, temperatures, 

and other characteristics numerically. 

Limitations in computer size and speed 

force modelers to characterize the land, 

its features and behavior, in aggregates. 

The complexity of our immediate neighborhood, which is so familiar, is therefore lost when a regional representation 

is formed. Few studies have been done 

on the quantitative validity of such generalization. The National Mapping Division 

is studying the problems of quantitative 

scaling of environmental observations 

and descriptions as part of its effort to 

develop strategies for observing and 

describing the land portion of the global 

environment. The strategy-development 

efforts are, themselves, interdisciplinary 

studies done in collaboration with scientists of many agencies, institutions, and 

disciplines. Once the strategies are developed, the data gathering will also be 

interdisciplinary, multi-institutional 

endeavors. 

The USGS's EROS Data Center is 

home to a 20-year archive of Landsat 

images (both digital and film) as well as 

to millions of scenes of satellite and aerial 

photographs that provide a unique set of 

historical environmental observations. 

The Data Center's activities are expanding considerably in support of interdisciplinary studies of global change. The 

Data Center will become the long-term 

archive for data obtained by NASA's 

Earth Observing System, Eos— set for 

launch in the mid-1990's. These observations and others will provide an enduring resource for scientists who study 

the function and changes in the global 

environment. 

The Digital 

Topographic Map 

of the Future 

By John E. Findley 

Scientists in many different disciplines, both in government and the private sector, use and depend upon reliable 

earth science data. Until the mid-1970's, 

analog data in the form of printed line 

maps and image products were the sole 

source of base cartographic data. More 

recently, base cartographic and other 

earth science data have been made available in digital or computer-generated 

form. These data were initially developed 

for use only by scientists and were typically distributed on 9-track computer 

tape without supporting software. The 

user community, therefore, was effectively limited to persons having some 

background in the earth sciences (particularly a working knowledge of coordinate 

geometry and transformations), a reasonable level of programming skill or access 

to programming resources, and access to 

a mainframe or large minicomputer. 

Before microcomputers and the 

development of the geographic information systems industry, these limitations 

were not significant impediments. Few 

users possessed the knowledge to effectively use the data, and even fewer had 

access to adequate computing resources. 

Today, however, with the phenomenal 

computing power that is readily available 

in the microcomputer market at reasonable prices, and the flexible data integration and manipulation software that is 

available from numerous vendors, the 

potential user community of earth science data has become enormous. The 

USGS and other suppliers of digital spatial data need to evolve with the user 

community and with applicable technology and, accordingly, to provide data in 

64 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
forms compatible with emerging hardware and software systems. 

Toward this end, the USGS is investigating several novel approaches for providing users with reliable and accurate 

data on a number of different media. 

One such approach is an ongoing 

research effort called the "Digital Topographic Map of the Future," the objective 

of which is to develop prototype models 

of advanced digital data sets on 

CD—ROM (Compact Disk—Read Only 

Memory) that depict county-based geographic information. This project proposes to test not only a novel medium for 

data distribution (CD—ROM) but also a 

novel spatial coverage (county versus the 

traditional quadrangle base) and a novel 

marketing approach in which data display and processing software will be 

packaged with the data. The goal is to 

develop a distribution package that will 

permit novice users to create or display 

custom maps from standard National 

Mapping Program digital data by using 

personal computers. The initial test 

CD—ROM will contain software to allow 

users to display digital line graph, digital 

elevation model, Geographic Names 

Information System data, and orthophotoimages of Arlington County, Va. 

Large-Scale Image 

Mapping—Digital 

Orthophotoquads 

By John E. Findley 

The USGS is the Federal agency that 

is responsible for providing much of the 

spatial information that is used by scientists to review, analyze, and evaluate geographic information. In the past, this 

spatial information was conveyed primarily by aerial photographs, line maps, 

data digitized from maps, and standard 

orthophotoquads. The USGS has developed advanced techniques to produce a 

new product termed a "digital" orthophotoquad from aerial photographs. 

To produce these digital orthophotoquads, computer-generated files, created 

by scanning aerial photographs, are digitally rectified by using a digital elevation 

model to remove displacement of features in the photograph due to changes 

in elevation. The resulting digital orthophotoquad accurately portrays ground 

distance and the spatial relationships 

among objects in the image. A major 

advantage of the digital orthophotoquad 

is that advanced computer processing, 

such as image enhancement, data merging, and digital mosaicking, can be 

applied to improve the interpretability of 

the photograph, to allow other geographic and cartographic data to be 

simultaneously considered, and to permit 

adjacent photographs to be joined into a 

single larger map. 

In a pilot project with the Soil Conservation Service, Department of Agriculture, the USGS prepared 140 3.75- by 

3.75-minute digital orthophotoquads 

(quarter-quadrangles) at 1:12,000 scale 

over Dane County, Wis. Both the scale 

and the location were selected as being 

the most useful for a number of potential 

applications. Samples of corresponding 

soft-copy products also were produced 

for this project for evaluation by the Soil 

Conservation Service. Several additional 

prototype products are being prepared to 

determine the usefulness of orthophoto 

quarter-quadrangles for selected areas, 

Digital orthophotograph of 

Black Earth, Wis., created by 

using advanced computer 

techniques. 

National Mapping Program 65 
especially those urban and suburban 

areas that are experiencing rapid change 

and development. The USGS and the 

Soil Conservation Service also are evaluating the use of digital orthophotographs 

in geographic information system applications. Continued development of both 

hard-copy and digital orthophoto products will provide a valuable addition to 

the USGS's National Mapping Program, 

particularly the National Digital Cartographic Data Base. 

U.S. Geological 

Survey-Census Bureau 

Cooperation 

Continues — Production 

of Agricultural Atlas 

By Loreen G. Utz 

When the Nation's census takers 

have finished gathering the information 

on the population of the United States, 

the work on producing the results of the 

1990 decennial census will have just 

begun. Maps will be needed to help statisticians, demographers, policymakers, 

and others use the myriad of information 

from the census. 

The USGS expects to plot data for 

more than 6,000 maps during the 3-year 

period following the 1990 census in continued support to the Bureau of the 

Census. 

The USGS has been working with 

the Census Bureau since 1983 in preparation for the 1990 census. As part of an 

amendment to that working agreement, 

the two agencies began a cooperative 

pilot project in fiscal year 1989 to test 

methods for producing publicationquality maps from digital data. By using 

information from the recent Census of 

Agriculture and land-use information 

and film plots supplied by the USGS, the 

Census Bureau will produce the 1987 

Agricultural Atlas of the United States. 

From this pilot project the two agencies 

will determine the most effective method 

to use in preparing the extensive number 

of maps for the 1990 decennial census. 

Work on the pilot project began in 

June 1989. The USGS provided land 

use information for the Agricultural 

Atlas by using the data from its 

1:7,500,000-scale "Land Use" map in 

the National Atlas of the United States of 

America. When the pilot project began, 

no digital data were available for this 

map; only the map separates used in the 

original printing existed. In the mapmaking process, information to be portrayed 

on the map is color separated into individual sheets that are used in the offset 

printing process. To capture the graphic 

data from the original map separates in 

From this pilot project 

the two agencies will 

determine the most 

effective method to use in 

preparing the extensive 

number of maps for the 

1990 decennial census. 

digital form, the USGS used a method 

called raster scanning, in which the lines 

and other markings on a map are converted into computer-readable form. 

Photographic methods were used to combine the separate map sheets to make a 

color proof for each of the 16 different 

land use categories. Each of the color 

proofs was scanned and edited to remove 

extraneous detail. The resulting raster 

data files were sent to the Census 

Bureau, where they were subsequently 

converted to a format compatible with 

Census data. 

Over 300 maps—about 200 dot distribution maps and about 100 choropleth 

(thematic) maps—will be produced for 

the 1987 Agricultural Atlas of the United 

States. Dot distribution maps consist of 

dot symbols representing the collected 

statistics. Because the data were collected 

by county, each county will be portrayed 

with an appropriate number of dots representing the density of the data. Evenly 

distributed dots throughout each county 

would mislead map users into believing 

that the data are also evenly distributed. 

66 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
To present a more accurate portrayal, 

the Bureau of the Census will apply landuse information to influence the distribution of the dots. For example, if a county 

produces 435,000 bushels of wheat and 

1,000 bushels are represented by 1 dot, 

then 435 dots would be placed in that 

county. However, any land within that 

county that is classified as urban or 

woodland would receive no dots because 

one would assume that no wheat would 

be grown in those areas. 

The choropleth maps will consist of 

county units, colored to create lighter or 

darker areas in direct proportion to the 

density of distribution of the theme subject. Each county is treated as a single 

unit without regard for the actual location of the theme within the county. 

The production of the 1987 Agricultural Atlas of the United States will serve 

as a prototype for the production of the 

thousands of maps that will result from 

the 1990 decennial census. 

Side-Looking Airborne 

Radar Glacier 

Research 

By John E. Jones, Bruce F. 

Molnia, Robert M. Krimmel, 

and James W. Schoonmaker, Jr. 

A USGS study of Malaspina Glacier 

found that certain bands of airborne and 

satellite radar images show large patterns 

of complex bright and dark radar backscatter on the surface of the glacier. 

These patterns, 0.3 to 6.0 miles in length, 

create a visual image that resembles bedrock features and the topography of 

nearby mountains, such as cirques and 

drainage networks. When inspecting airborne radar images from 1976, 1980, 

and 1986 and Seasat satellite radar 

images from 1978, along with topographic maps prepared from aerial photographs flown in 1958 and 1978 and 

other data sets, scientists found that the 

patterns have been stationary for nearly 

30 years. This finding is unusual because 

ice-flow velocities of Malaspina Glacier 

are typically 0.1 mile a year near the center of the glacier and up to 3.0 miles a 

year in localized areas of the glacier during surges. A team of scientists visited the 

glacier in September 1988 to investigate 

both the causes of the discrepancy 

between ice-flow velocities and stationary 

patterns and the characteristics of the 

glacier's surface corresponding to the 

backscatter patterns. 

Investigators found that the patterns 

on the radar images generally correspond 

to adjacent topographic highs and lows 

of the glacier's surface. The bright signatures are usually topographic highs that 

are characterized by extensive crevassing; 

the dark signatures are topographic lows 

having few crevasses. Because the patterns remain stationary while the ice 

moves across the patterns, the investigators hypothesize that the glacier's surface 

features mimic the configuration of the 

glacially and fluvially eroded bed at 

depths as great as 3,000 feet below the 

ice surface. Like standing waves in a 

flowing stream, the topographic lows, or 

swales, appear to be areas of compressional flow, while the topographic highs 

are characterized by extentional flow. 

Airborne and satellite radar detect 

the features because crevasses and large 

hummocks on topographic highs act as 

radar reflectors and backscatter a large 

portion of the signal, whereas water and 

snow in the smoother surfaced topographic lows reduce the return signal. 

Scientists plan to conduct ice-penetrating 

radar surveys to develop this concept further. The investigation is also being 

expanded to Bering, Hubbard, and 

Grand Plateau Glaciers, all located along 

the coast of southern Alaska. 

These observations and hypotheses 

have important implications. Because crevassed and uncrevassed zones can be 

identified by using radar data, safe landing sites and transportation routes can be 

mapped to facilitate geologic exploration. 

This technique was used successfully during the 1988 field investigation of 

Malaspina Glacier. Further, if the surface 

topography on this glacier and other ice 

sheets is an expression of subglacial morphology, then it may be possible to 

develop a fluid dynamics model for estimating ice volume in support of globalchange investigations. This model would 

use remotely sensed data to measure 

ice-sheet area, flow velocities, wave 

National Mapping Program 67 
Location map showing 

Malaspina Glacier and other 

area glaciers. 

X-band side-looking airborne 

radar image acquired in November 1986 of part of the 

Malaspina Glacier, Alaska. A 

number of unusual radar backscatter responses are shown that 

resemble the adjacent terrain. 

These features correlate to topographic highs and lows on the 

glacier's surface. The area 

shown is approximately 25 by 

40 miles. 

144 ° 140 ° 136 ° 

60° Cape Suckling 

Bering 

Glacier 

MALASPINA 

GLACIER 

t:Cbc 

--1,0 • Yakutat 

144 ° Grand Plateau 

Glacier 

GULF OF ALASKA 

Fairweather 

Glacier 

La Perouse 

Glacier 

CAPE SPENCER 

Enlarged Area 

— 58° 0 25 50 MILES 

16 

1 1 1 1 1 

0 25 50 75 100 KILOMETERS 

amplitude, and other parameters needed standing of the dynamics of ice sheets 

to estimate volume. In addition, because and also may help us to unravel the 

Malaspina Glacier has an area of more course of events, both climatological and 

than 1,600 square miles and is similar in biological, that accompanied the advance 

many ways to the continental ice sheets and retreat of the Pleistocene ice sheets — 

of the Pleistocene Epoch, the study of a critical piece in sorting out the globalMalaspina may give us a better under- change puzzle. 

68 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
International Activities 


Mission 

The U.S. Geological Survey continued to be active in international studies 

in science and technology as an adjunct 

to its domestic program during FY 1989. 

Authorization for foreign investigations is 

provided by the Organic Act, as revised, 

and the Foreign Assistance Act and 

related legislation. Activities are conducted under bilateral or multilateral 

agreements that require approval by the 

U.S. Departments of the Interior and of 

State. The following factors largely 

influence decisions as to whether the 

studies are in the interests of the U.S. 

Government: 

• Domestic research objectives will be 

expanded in scope and achieved through 

the comparative studies of scientific phenomena nationally and internationally. 

• Information about existing and 

potential foreign resources of interest to 

the United States will be obtained and 

incorporated in worldwide data bases. 

• Scientific knowledge, understanding, 

expertise, and reputation of the USGS 

and of the United States in the earth sciences will be broadened and appropriately recognized internationally. 

• Relations with foreign counterpart 

institutions will be developed and maintained, and the programs will facilitate 

scientific cooperation, technology transfer, and data exchange. 

• International programs of other Federal agencies, academia, and the private 

sector will be supported; in particular the 

Department of State will receive adequate 

scientific information required to formulate foreign policy objectives and decisions. 

Funds for USGS technical assistance 

to foreign countries, including all training programs either within or outside the 

United States, are supplied by other Federal agencies, international organizations, 

or foreign governments. Assistance programs provide for transfer of technology 

to foreign nationals by advice, training, 

and demonstrations. A small amount of 

the funds appropriated annually to the 

USGS for research is used in cooperative ventures with foreign counterpart 

organizations that also supply funding 

and (or) services-in-kind. Cooperative 

projects range from individual scientistto-scientist discussions, correspondence, 

and exchange visits on topics of mutual 

interest to jointly staffed, formally organized, bilateral scientific research, and 

multilaterally coordinated investigations 

that focus on a variety of scientific 

phenomena. 

Highlights 

Seasonal Vegetation 

Mapping by Satellite 

for Grasshopper and 

Locust Control in 

Africa 

By G. Gray Tappan, Dean 

Tyler, and Donald G. Moore 

While rainfall in both the Saharan 

and sub-Saharan countries of Africa has 

broken the drought of the mid-1980's, it 

also has produced favorable habitat conditions for the breeding of grasshoppers 

and locusts. The resulting insect infestations threaten the region's ability to produce sufficient food supplies. Monitoring 

vegetation conditions favorable to grasshoppers and locusts is essential for effective control programs. In support of an 

international effort to control these pests, 

International Activities 69 
The 10 countries that have participated in the greenness mapping program. 

WESTERN SAHARA 

(MOROCCO) 

the U.S. Agency for International Development requested the EROS Data Center 

of the U.S. Geological Survey in Sioux 

Falls, S. Dak., to develop and put into 

place a seasonal vegetation monitoring 

program. The program uses National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Advanced Very High Resolution 

Radiometer (AVHRR) satellite data and 

USGS geographic information systems 

technology. 

The greenness field sheets 

provide information on 

favorable grasshopper and 

locust habitats. 

Data received daily from the 

AVHRR were merged with a cartographic data base to produce Normalized 

Difference Vegetation Index (greenness) 

field sheets. The field sheets are produced at a scale of 1:2,500,000 (1 inch 

represents about 40 miles) for most 

countries and are sent by express mail 

from South Dakota to Africa every 2 

weeks. The greenness information, which 

relates to vegetation growth and condition, is used to monitor the complex seasonal patterns of greening-up and drying 

of vegetation on a countrywide basis 

through the critical periods of vegetation growth and grasshopper and locust 

activity. 

The field sheets are used by numerous organizations involved in grasshopper and locust control in Africa. The 

primary users include national crop 

protection services in Africa, the U.S. 

Agency for International Development, 

and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. Training is provided to users in each country on how to 

interpret and to use the information in 

their surveillance systems. Grasshopper 

and locust control teams use the sheets 

for planning and conducting field and 

aerial surveys to locate infestation areas 

more efficiently. Sheet use is based on 

the principle that seasonal rainfall triggers both the growth of herbaceous vege70 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
:Cumulative Rainfall (mm) through July 1;1987 

SOURCE: AGRHYMET 

fall (mm) through July 30, 1987 

OURCE: AGRHYMET 

22 

72 

183 

*.Ground Photo. 4, 

116 

cumulative Rainfall (mm) through August 10, 1987 

SOURCE: AGRHYMET 

A series of greenness field sheets of Senegal that indicate the devel- fall within the three periods represented by the sheets. A qualitative 

opment of vegetation cover triggered by the northward advancement comparison between the greenness values and actual ground condiof rains. The adjacent ground photographs were taken near Tiel, tions can be made. (Ground photographs by Philip K. Mueller, priSenegal. The photograph dates of June 22, July 21, and August 3 vate collection.) 

tation and the hatching of grasshopper Because of the success and wideand locust eggs. By focusing on land spread acceptance of the field sheets, the 

areas that are greening or already green, program has been used in 10 countries in 

survey teams can significantly narrow the Africa: Algeria, Chad, Gambia, Mali, 

areas to be covered by both land and Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Senegal, 

aerial survey efforts. Sudan, and Tunisia. During 1989, 

International Activities 71 
A United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization locust expert (front right) and staff 

from the Mali Crop Protection Service interpret probable locust habitats to support field 

operations. Based on their assessment, a helicopter or a field survey crew will be 

dispatched to confirm the status of grasshoppers and the desert locust. (Photograph by 

Gray Tappan, TGS Technology, Inc.) 

Mali Crop Protection Service 

staff evaluate a habitat heavily 

infested with the desert locust, 

while the locust take to the air. 

(Photograph by Gray Tappan.) 

approximately 1 billion hectares were 

monitored every 2 weeks. The next and 

necessary phase is to establish the monitoring capability in Africa. The USGS is 

currently transferring the capability to 

the Agriculture-Hydrology-Meteorology 

Center in Niger, which oversees a regional program in sub-Saharan Africa 

that provides a data collection and distribution network for tracking climatic and 

agricultural conditions. The USGS is 

also transferring the technology to a 

regional north Africa institute in Tunisia. 

Lessons from the 

December 7, 1988, 

Spitak, Armenia— 

Earthquake 

By Walter W. Hays 

Introduction 

Armenia, a Soviet Socialist Republic, 

is located in an environment where, over 

time, the collision of the Eurasian and 

Arabian tectonic plates has produced a 

broad zone of faulting and crustal deformation that extends southward from the 

Caucasus Mountains in Armenia to 

northern Turkey and Iran. The December 7, 1988, earthquake that centered on 

Spitak, Armenia, is the latest in a long 

series of earthquakes in the region that 

reflects the ongoing collision of the 

plates. The magnitude 6.8 earthquake 

was one of the worst disasters of the 20th 

century. It struck Spitak at 11:41 a.m., 

local time, and left an estimated 25,000 

dead, 18,000 injured, 510,000 homeless, 

and reconstruction costs of $16 billion. It 

reminded the world of the damage that 

an earthquake can do to a nation, its 

urban centers, gross national product, 

and to the fabric of the society. 

An earthquake disaster can serve as 

an all-too uncomfortable reminder of 

how unprepared an area may be to cope 

with such a calamity. Such disasters show 

whether or not preparedness planning 

and mitigation measures were adequate. 

They also test the siting, design, and construction practices for lifelines, buildings, 

and critical facilities. Perhaps most critically, earthquakes and their aftermath 

stretch the capacity of the populace to 

respond to these disasters and to modify 

their activities and practices during the 

recovery period. 

Important Lessons 

Multidisciplinary studies of the 1988 

Armenia earthquake by a U.S. team of 

experts in cooperation with their Soviet 

counterparts and previous studies of 

72 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
other earthquakes have taught us many 

important lessons. Several of these lessons, which have direct bearing on the 

disaster in Armenia, are as follows: 

• The parameters of the fault located 

near Spitak shaped the nature of the 

disaster. The Spitak fault, which released 

the December 7, 1988, earthquake, is a 

reverse fault that is tectonically related to 

the much more prominent North Savan 

fault. Both faults were mapped prior to 

the earthquake, and these maps showed 

that the faults had moved in the last 

10,000 to 2 million years. The Spitak 

fault broke the surface on December 7th 

over a distance of 9 miles, which resulted 

in nearly 6.6 feet of vertical movement or 

displacement. 

• Unfortunately, as such disasters 

prove, a community that has not 

prepared for a damaging earthquake is 

particularly vulnerable to disaster, especially if damaging earthquakes have 

occurred in the past. Despite past damaging earthquakes, Armenia was unprepared for the December 7th earthquake. 

In 1967, a magnitude 5.1 earthquake 

centered near Spitak caused minor damage. The most significant recent event in 

the area, a magnitude 6.5 earthquake 

that occurred on May 28, 1926, caused 

severe damage in Leninakan (formerly 

known as Alexanderkan). 

• The destructiveness of an earthquake 

depends on its size, proximity to an 

urban center, the soil underlying the 

buildings, facilities, and lifelines in the 

center, and the state-of-preparedness in 

the centers. 

Villages like Spitak and Stephankan 

took a "direct hit" in the epicentral 

region. Leninakan, although 25 miles 

from the epicenter, sustained heavy damage because the soil underlying the city 

amplified the ground motion. This phenomenon was similar to that experienced 

in Mexico City in the September 19, 

1985, Mexico earthquake. 

• In such a disaster, a community is 

always working against time. Critical time 

frames for responses by a community 

range from a few seconds to centuries, 

which compounds the difficulties in providing adequate preparation and hazard 

response. By being better aware of what 

the timing is of various earthquake hazards and necessary responses, communities can be better prepared. 

0 5 10 MILES 

I I 

1 I I I 

0 ��5 10 KILOMETERS 

Spitak fault that generated the 

December 7, 1988, earthquake. 

The fault broke the surface over 

a distance of 9 miles and had 

nearly 6.6 feet of vertical displacement. (Photograph by 

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, El Cerrito, 

Calif.) 

Seconds—For duration of ground shaking 

(Spitak probably experienced less than 10 

seconds of ground shaking). 

Minutes—Before the first aftershock 

occurs (a magnitude 5.8 aftershock 

occurred 5 minutes after the main shock, 

causing damaged buildings, schools, hospitals, and factories to collapse). 

Hours to a few days—For emergency 

International Activities 73 
Damage to buildings having 

load-bearing walls made of 

stone, which were the predominant construction type in Spitak, 

Armenia, ranged from damage 

that typically occurred at building corners (A) to the total destruction of buildings (B). (Photographs by Earthquake 

Engineering Research Institute, 

El Cerrito, Calif.) 

response and search and rescue activities 

(90 percent of the people rescued from 

the collapsed buildings were saved in the 

first 24 hours). 

Years to decades—For community preparedness and recovery programs (a 

warning of the increased probability for a 

damaging earthquake in the region was 

issued prior to the earthquake by Soviet 

scientists, but the warning had not been 

acted upon). 

Decades to centuries—For the seismic cycles 

of active faults to come full circle with 

the consequent fault rupture; that is, 

another earthquake which begins the 

cycle again (Armenia has many active 

faults that have been mapped; determination of their seismic cycle is in 

progress). 

The disaster in Armenia would have 

been lessened if the earthquake had 

occurred 5 minutes later when the school 

children were outside the schools that 

were destroyed and on their way home 

for lunch. Although communities have 

no control over the exact times of earthquakes, there are effective steps that can 

be taken to lessen effects. In Armenia, 

greater efforts need to be made to increase the level of personal preparedness and increase communitywide preparedness. 

• Earthquake predictions and hazards 

warnings are only of limited value when 

the responsible society is not able to 

properly address and implement the scientific knowledge available. Although 

Soviet authorities had been advised 3 

years ago by their scientists of the 

increased probability of a damaging 

earthquake in Armenia, the capability to 

respond at the community level was not 

yet in place. It is unfortunate that it 

sometimes takes a disaster of such large 

proportion to ensure that available scientific expertise and knowledge is used to 

properly plan for disasters. We in the 

United States are not as prepared as we 

should be for similar disasters in many 

earthquake-prone areas of the country. 

Only in California, where more than 50 

years of earthquake preparedness and 

mitigation strategies have been studied 

and implemented, are we able to survive 

a 7.1 magnitude earthquake like the one 

that occurred in Santa Cruz, Calif., on 

October 17, 1989, with only 62 deaths. 

• Extensive building damage occurs in 

earthquakes because we often underesti74 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
mate the amplitude, frequency composition, and duration of the ground shaking. The Armenian earthquake had a 

local epicentral intensity of IX—X, 

whereas the buildings were designed to 

only withstand an intensity VII, which 

was only about one-eighth the actual 

force level of the earthquake. One reason 

why the building design was not 

adequate to withstand the ground shaking was that the ground motion amplification properties of the soil had not been 

taken into account in the zoning and 

building codes. 

We in the United States 

are not as prepared as we 

should be for similar 

disasters in many 

earthquake-prone areas 

of the country. 

• Good, quality construction can provide a margin of safety that can help 

compensate for the uncertainties that scientists and engineers still face in siting 

and design. The quality of construction 

and detailing were inadequate in Armenia to meet the force of the earthquake. 

Modern buildings designed and 

constructed in the 1970's failed and 

caused numerous deaths primarily 

because the floor systems were not constructed and anchored in a way that 

allowed them to absorb the energy along 

with the structure. 

• Despite whatever preparations are 

made and however carefully buildings 

are constructed, almost all earthquakes 

produce "surprises" because knowledge 

about the nature and effects of earthquakes is often lacking or what is known 

has not been properly applied. A damaging earthquake exposes the flaws in siting 

and design of structures and lifeline systems, construction practices, emergency 

response, and personal and community 

preparedness. In each of these areas, 

through the proper use of scientific 

information, much can be done to correct these critical flaws and to develop 

effective response plans to mitigate the 

effects of natural hazards. 

Although the Spitak earthquake was 

not a surprise in terms of the seismotectonic framework of the region, the 

disaster brought some harsh realities to 

light. The first 24 hours of search and 

rescue efforts were hampered by the winter environment. The disaster also paid 

grim testimony to the vulnerability of 

precast reinforced concrete frame buildings, many of which still exist in the 

Armenian capitol of Yerevan and in 

other parts of the Soviet Union. Perhaps 

most emotionally devastating was the 

extremely high death toll, which, combined with the harsh winter conditions, 

made burial of the dead difficult and created public health concerns. 

Using the Lessons Learned 

On May 23-27, 1989, representatives 

of the United States team that went to 

Armenia after the December 7th earthquake and other specialists met with their 

Soviet counterparts in Yerevan to share 

their insights with representatives of the 

French and Japanese teams. It is hoped 

that these insights will aid the Soviet's 

reconstruction program and also serve as 

the basis for other cooperative endeavors 

to reduce the chances of a disaster like 

this one from happening again in the 

Soviet Union or in the many other parts 

of the world that are vulnerable to natural disasters. 

Galeras Volcano 

Provides Opportune 

Site for Hazard 

Response Workshop 

By Mary Ellen Williams 

When Galeras Volcano near Pasto, 

Colombia, became visibly active in February 1989 after 2 years of intermittent 

precursor activity, it afforded the perfect 

site and opportunity for an international 

workshop on rapid response to volcanic 

crisis. The imminent potential for disaster was present throughout the training 

International Activities 75 
Galeras Volcano, Pasto, Colombia, May 1989, site of the international volcano workshop. 

(Photograph by David H. 

Harlow.) 

session (May 8-29, 1989). This workshop, 

which was originally planned to take 

place in Arequipa, Peru, gave participants an opportunity for hands-on training during a real crisis. Although the 

activity of Galeras Volcano had a substantial impact on the local economy, the volcano stabilized, and no mass evacuations 

were ordered. 

The workshop was held to assist in 

national and local efforts to respond to 

unrest at Galeras Volcano and to provide 

training to Latin American countries that 

were concerned with actions and problems associated with emergency response 

to volcanic crises. The 50 participants in 

the workshop came from Argentina, 

Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, and Peru. A dozen instructors 

from Colombia, Ecuador, and the United 

States taught the workshop sessions. 

Held in cooperation with the Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Geologicos Mineras (INGEOMINAS) of Colombia and the Colombia Geological Survey, 

the workshop was designed as a training 

activity by the Volcano Disaster Assistance Program (VDAP) of the USGS. 

VDAP is cooperatively funded by the 

USGS and the Agency for International 

Development's (AID) Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). Additional support for the workshop was 

given by Unesco's World Organization of 

Volcano Observatories (WOVO), USAID/ 

Bogota and Guatemala City, and the 

State of Narifio, the city of Pasto, and the 

Oficina Nacional para Asistencia de 

Desastres of Colombia. 

Prior to the establishment of the 

VDAP in 1986, the USGS and OFDA 

had mobilized their responses to volcanic 

disasters on a case-by-case basis. From 

those responses to volcanic crises, it 

was decided that to develop and to 

maintain a core team of scientists and 

technicians —VDAP — who could provide 

rapid response, assessment, monitoring, 

and training would be a more effective 

way to reduce the effects of volcanic hazards. Perhaps one of the most important 

aspects of the VDAP effort is that it 

assists developing countries to build their 

own technical institutions and to enhance 

their own response capabilities before 

volcanic crises occur. 

. . . one of the most 


important aspects of the 


VDAP effort is that 


it assists developing 


countries to build their 


own technical institutions 


and to enhance their own 


response capabilities before 


volcanic crises occur. 


The first week of the workshop was 

devoted to familiarizing the participants 

with Galeras Volcano, volcano hazards in 

general, various monitoring and forecasting techniques, data analyses, and methods of effective civil defense response 

by means of formal talks, videotapes, 

and field visits. The participants then 

were divided into groups to work with 

INGEOMINAS and public service groups 

to improve the monitoring and forecasting facilities on Galeras, to define hazards and risks associated with the volcano, and to assist ongoing education, 

information, and communication activities by national and local governmental 

and civil defense groups. 

The groups specifically addressed 

the following: 

• Hazards evaluations—Geologic field 

work to determine the nature and distri76 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
bution of ash, gas, and other eruptive 

products of past volcanic activity; solicitation and compilation of historical observations; and compilation of meteorologic 

data that pertain to volcanic hazards. 

• Risk assessment—Determination of 

civil infrastructure and population within 

the hazards zones. 

• Monitoring-forecasting—Seismic, 

deformation, geochemical monitoring, 

and upgrading and organizing a computer facility at Pasto Observatory. 

• Information-education—Evaluation 

and development of pamphlets and posters for the public; development of a videotape on volcanic hazards and Galeras 

Volcano. 

During the last week, the working 

groups summarized their studies and 

produced reports and other products 

that could be used by Colombian groups 

in response to an eruption of Galeras 

Volcano. These products were also 

intended to be used as guides in planning responses to future volcano crises in 

the participants' countries. On the final 

day, the findings and products were 

reviewed in a closing conference. Local 

and national Colombian officials and U.S. 

Embassy personnel joined the participants and instructors in reviewing the 

products and discussing the findings. 

Written reports were submitted to the 

workshop organizers. 

A resolution was also written and 

signed by workshop participants recognizing the need and giving full support 

to the formation of the Centro Andino 

du Volcanologia to assist at Galeras and 

to provide technical training and support 

during any future volcanic crisis in other 

locations in South America. 

As a result of the workshop in Pasto, 

Colombia, VDAP was able to contribute 

to strengthening the volcano observatory 

at Pasto. This recently established observatory had been sharing equipment with 

another Colombian volcano observatory 

in Manizales. The Manizales Observatory 

was established with assistance from the 

U.S. Government during the volcanic 

eruption of Nevado del Ruiz in 1985. 

Equipment for the Pasto Observatory has 

now been augmented substantially by the 

U.S. Government, and for several 

months, U.S. technical advisors for 

VDAP have monitored the volcano with 

the Colombians. A transfer of this equipment to the Government of Colombia is 

in progress. 

United States Hosts 

International 

Gathering of 6,000 

Earth Scientists 

By Bruce B. Hanshaw 

Introduction 

Just over 6,000 earth scientists, 

exhibitors, and guests representing 104 

countries around the world gathered in 

Washington, D.C., from July 9 through 

19 to attend the 28th Session of the 

International Geological Congress (IGC). 

The Congress was cohosted by the U.S. 

National Academy of Sciences and the 

U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation 

with nearly 150 scientific societies, governmental bodies, universities, industrial 

organizations, and individual sponsors. 

The United States has hosted two previous IGC's, the 5th in 1891 and the 16th 

in 1933. Fourteen members of the last 

U.S.-hosted (1933) IGC attended a 

reunion with other honored guests and 

IGC officials. The 28th was the largest 

Congress in its 121-year history. 

The 28th Congress featured more 

than 3,000 scientific and technical presentations on the latest research in geology, geochemistry, geophysics, and allied 

disciplines. Also featured were nearly 50 

Scientists measuring deformation, Galeras Volcano, Pasto, 

Colombia, May 1989. (Photograph by David H. Harlow.) 

International Activities 77 
pre- and post-Congress field trips to geologically significant areas across the 

United States, including Hawaii and 

Alaska. One trip, exploring the Scotia arc 

region, was the first formal geologic field 

trip ever to visit the Antarctic continent. 

During the Congress itself, 20 shorter 

trips studied aspects of the geology of the 

Washington, D.C., area. 

The scientific program of the Congress addressed current problems facing 

the geological sciences, many of worldwide concern, and stressed the increasingly interdisciplinary nature of approaches to their solution. Two onehalf-day all-Congress colloquia shed new 

light on fields of major interest to the 

world earth-science community, dealing 

with planetary geology and world natural 

resources, which included invited presentations by international panels of experts 

in these fields. 

Innovations 

The 28th IGC introduced several 

programmatic features not seen at previous Congresses. With the Youth Congress program, the IGC reintroduced 

and expanded an activity seen at only 

two previous Congresses. The Youth 

Congress provided 85 young people, 

aged 13-19, who accompanied their parents to the IGC, with entertaining and 

educational opportunities to increase 

their knowledge and interest in the earth 

sciences. Activities included hunting for 

fossil shark teeth, exploring local caves, 

hiking through the rocky Potomac River 

Gorge, going "behind the scenes" at 

museums of the Smithsonian Institution, 

and visiting the Goddard Space Center of 

the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. 

Grant programs that had been used 

in some previous Congresses to help 

defray expenses of scientists from developing countries became a formal part of 

the 28th IGC program. The Geohost 

Grant Program helped individual scientists, principally those from developing 

countries, to attend the Congress by partially subsidizing the expenses incurred 

within the United States. Selection to the 

program was competitive. A panel composed of representatives of the IGC, 

International Union of Geological Sciences, Unesco, and the Association of 

Geoscientists for International Development chose 50 grantees and 15 alternates 

from among 400 qualified applicants. 

The Travel Grant Program, like the 

Geohost Program, helped individual scientists, principally from developing countries, to attend the Congress by partially 

subsidizing travel costs to Washington, 

D.C. This program which was funded 

entirely by Unesco, provided funds to 43 

participants from 41 developing countries. Thirty-eight of the 43 grantees 

also received funds from the Geohost 

program. 

A program of short courses and 

workshops provided participants ways 

and means to exchange and share stateof-the-art knowledge in areas of scientific 

or technological interest. Short courses 

were presented by discipline specialists in 

an instructional format to professional 

earth scientists who desired specialized 

training in a new discipline or merely 

wished to broaden their general knowledge. Workshops provided selective 

forums at which knowledge of new 

research could be shared and discussed 

among specialists in a subject area. 

Poster sessions, a meeting presentation format growing in popularity, allocated wall space on which a presenter 

could hang maps, diagrams, photographs, and brief explanatory text. The 

presentation material remained on display for one-half day. The author was 

present during that time to interact with 

interested colleagues, explaining, discussing, and defending the posted results. 

The IGC Gazette, part of the publicity and news media activities of the 28th 

IGC, was a 4-page daily newspaper that 

focused attention on scientific themes 

and issues of that day's symposia and 

poster sessions. The Gazette also featured 

articles and editorials about the organization and management of the Congress, 

the history and infrastructure of geological science, announced social activities, 

and kept delegates informed of lastminute schedule changes. News releases 

issued in advance of the Congress and 

daily news conferences, radio feeds, and 

interviews with scientists during the Congress ensured that word of the Congress, 

its activities, and advances in the earth 

sciences reached a wide national and 

international audience. 

78 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
International 

Geological Congress 

Awards 

The Spendiarov Prize from the 

USSR Academy of Sciences, the most 

prestigious award given at the IGC and 

presented to an outstanding scientist in 

the host country, was presented to Susan 

Werner Kieffer of the U.S. Geological 

Survey. Kieffer joined the USGS in 1979 

and was elected to the National Academy 

of Sciences in 1986. Kieffer, who is the 

first woman and the third American to 

win the Spendiarov Prize, was cited for 

her "contributions to our knowledge of 

the Earth and the planets" and for her 

prolific research in fields ranging from 

volcanology and planetology to thermodynamics and river hydraulics. Her 

research has included work on mechanisms of eruption for volcanoes and geysers, the prediction of thermodynamic 

properties of minerals, and the effect of 

shock waves during planetary impacts. 

The Hans Cloos Medal, the highest 

award of the International Association of 

Engineering Geology (IAEG) was presented to David Varnes on July 13. 

Varnes, an engineering geologist with the 

USGS for the past 48 years was honored 

for his contributions to the scientific 

basics of engineering geology and for his 

service to the profession and the IAEG. 

A recognized specialist in the study of 

landslides, Varnes is now working on 

methods of predicting earthquakes. He 

has made significant contributions to science through the publication of more 

than 100 papers, booklets, and monographs. His book, "Landslide Hazard 

Zonation," has become a classic in the 

field. Varnes also was cited for his contributions to the development of the IAEG. 

Looking Ahead: 29th 

International 

Geological Congress 

Japan will host the 29th International Geological Congress (IGC), 

scheduled from August 24 to September 

3, 1992, in Kyoto. The Congress will 

meet in the Kyoto International Conference Hall, which is a fully equipped, 

modern convention facility located in the 

northern suburbs of Kyoto City. The 

site, noted for its beautifully tailored 

Japanese-style gardens, is a convenient 

base from which to tour old Kyoto, 

the ancient capital of Japan, and other 

attractions. 

The 29th will be the first IGC held 

in an active island-arc setting. Thus, the 

scientific program will focus on geologic 

processes and phenomena that characterize or are associated with island arcs. A 

range of field trips to geologically important areas of Japan and neighboring 

countries will emphasize island-arc geology and geophysics. 

Abu Dhabi Image 

Mapping 

By Jean-Claude M. Thomas 

In seeking a sound scientific basis 

upon which to effectively manage and 

conserve their critical ground-water 

resources, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi of 

the United Arab Emirates sought the 

cooperation of the USGS. Under a Memorandum of Understanding between the 

USGS and the National Drilling Company, an agency of the Emirate of Abu 

Dhabi, a project was begun in October 

1988 to exchange scientific and technical 

knowledge to augment the scientific 

capabilities of the National Drilling 

Company. 

The project is designed specifically 

to assess the ground-water resources of 

the Al Ain and Liwa Oasis areas—the two 

major areas in Abu Dhabi where significant freshwater is known to occur. This 

project, which involves a staff of nine 

USGS scientists and support staff based 

in Al Ain, provides an opportunity to 

apply ground-water systems-assessment 

techniques and methodologies developed 

in the U.S. domestic programs in a foreign, arid environment having marked 

hydrologic, physiographic, and geologic 

differences from better known domestic 

terrains. New knowledge gained from 

International Activities 79 
Figure 1. Emirate of Abu 

Dhabi, United Arab Emirates 

Landsat satellite image map. 

Note to the east the dark 

ophiolite rocks and the metamorphosed younger sedimentary rocks of the Musandam 

peninsula, in the southeast the 

agricultural town of Al Dhaid, 

and to the southwest the cities 

of Al Sharjah and Ajman. 

the Abu Dhabi studies will in turn be 

applied by USGS scientists to enhance 

future domestic ground-water assessment 

programs. 

The water-resources assessment 

project was hampered by three factors: 

(1) the lack of systematic map coverage 

of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi at the 

1:20,000 and (or) 1:50,000 scales, (2) the 

need to be able to locate water wells, and 

(3) the need to map the geology and 

hydrogeology quickly. Satellite image 

maps of the area have answered these 

needs. An image map of the country at 

the 1:250,000 scale was prepared and 

found particularly useful for delineating 

areas. This mosaic of nine individual 

Landsat Thematic Mapper images was 

assembled by computer. The mosaic displays the data of band 2 (green-yellow), 

band 4 (near-infrared), and band 7 (middle infrared) of the Thematic Mapper. 

For the first time, an "adjustable" filter 

was used on the data from these various 

bands, which eliminates haloing and ringing in areas of high tone contrast, for 

example, contrast between dark ocean 

and light beach, ophiolite rocks and limestone, oasis vegetation, and sands (fig. 1). 

More detailed image maps at the 

1:20,000 scale for field work and at the 

1:50,000 scale for compilation and publication were generated by merging data 

from two satellites. These image maps 

5 10 15 20 MILES 1 1 1 1 1 � 

1 1 0 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS 

80 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
display the most useful radiometric information from the Landsat Thematic Mapper bands 2, 4, and 7 and add to it the 

sharpness of the 10-meter resolution 

of the French SPOT (Satellite pour 

l'Observation de la Terre) High Resolution Visible Panchromatic. 

To date, 47 image maps have been 

completed in support of the groundwater research project in the Al Ain 

piedmont areas, and another 56 are 

being generated for the Liwa Oasis area 

within a short timeframe. The specifications and quality control of the work are 

performed by the USGS and most of the 

work is done by private contractors. 

Other International 

Program Activities 

The strengthening of earth-science 

institutions in foreign countries, training 

of foreign nationals, and exchange of 

scientists are activities integral to all international programs. During FY 1989, 79 

nationals from 22 countries received 

training in the United States. Fifty-seven 

visiting scientists from 16 countries either 

conducted research at the USGS or at 

other facilities as arranged by the USGS. 

USGS personnel trained more than 60 

foreign-national scientists and technicians 

either individually in-country or collectively in groups at scheduled regional 

training sessions. Examples include the 

marine geology course in Turkey (31 

participants). More than 30 countries 

benefited from these USGS overseas 

training efforts. 

Many staff scientists represent the 

USGS or the U.S. Government while 

they serve as officers, committee members, or participants in international 

organizations, commissions, and associations; for example, many hundreds of 

hours of effort were provided by USGS 

personnel, in cooperation with hundreds 

of other U.S. earth scientists, in the preparation and presentation of the 28th 

International Geological Congress in 

Washington, D.C., during July 1989. 

James F. Devine, USGS Assistant Director for Engineering Geology, was 

appointed Senior Science Advisor to the 

United Nations International Decade of 

Natural Disaster Reduction. He will serve 

in Switzerland from December 1988 to 

June 1990 to establish the Secretariat and 

implement the Decade. 

Activities with sponsoring countries 

listed in the following text were conducted by the USGS in FY 1989 under 

bilateral agreements sanctioned by the 

Departments of State and of the Interior: 

Abu Dhabi road, 1:50,000-scale 

image map. Note the light green 

strips of irrigated acacias that 

protect the road, cultivated 

areas, and village of Al Khazna 

from drifting sands. 

International Activities 81 
Australia 

Hydrologic network design. 

Bangladesh 

Strengthening the Geological Survey of 

Bangladesh; mapping the extensive 

Ganges Brahmaputra Delta. 

Bolivia 

Evaluation of SPOT/LANDSAT images 

and map revision at 1:50,000 scale. 

Canada 

Marine geology; geophysics; water 

resources; acid rain; ore deposit models; platinum group elements; Great 

Lakes seismicity; Arctic research; mapping data exchange; border digital 

mapping; atmospheric deposition. 

Chile 

Seismic zoning; improved earthquakeresistant designs. 

China 

Surveying and mapping research—cartographic applications of remote sensing and development of geographic 

information systems. Earth sciences 

research— pyrophyllite deposits; comparative geochemical anomalies in Xinjiang and Southwestern United States; 

modeling for Bayan Obo ironniobium-rare earth deposit in Inner 

Mongolia; exploration for gold and 

uranium deposits. Surface-water 

research—sediment transport; hydrologic equipment and measurements; 

hydrologic extremes; analytical techniques; hydrologic data exchange; cold 

regions hydrology; isotope research. 

Earthquake research—deep crustal 

structures in fault zones; premonitory 

phenomena; crustal stress; seismic networks; rock mechanics; intraplate 

active faults. 

Costa Rica 

Biochemical research; coal resource 

assessment review. 

Dominican Republic 

Study of biochemical corrosion of gates 

of the Sabama Yequa Reservoir. 

El Salvador 

Geologic hazards assessment; evaluation of seismic hazards and compilation 

of seismic risk map. 

France 

Oceanography; geophysics; radioactive 

wastes; minerals assessment; bore-hole 

geophysics application to water resources; sea-ice monitoring; remote 

sensing in polar regions. 

Germany 

Marine seismology; radioactive wastes; 

petroleum resource assessment; Antarctica research; sea-ice monitoring; 

marine minerals assessment. 

Greenland 

Ice-penetrating radar surveys. 

Hungary 

Petroleum resource potential of the 

Pannonian Basin; geophysics. 

Iceland 

Geophysics; geology; hydrology. 

India 

Multidisciplinary workshops; groundwater modeling and data-base development; identification of mutually beneficial joint projects. 

Indonesia 

Volcano hazard mapping; institution 

development in marine geology; peat 

swamps as coal field analogs. 

Italy 

Installation of digital seismographs; 

earthquake reconstruction; improvement of capability for early warnings 

of volcanic eruptions; Antarctic 

research. 

Japan 

Deeply buried mineral deposits; gold 

deposits; debris-flow hazards; sediment 

transport on continental shelves and in 

estuaries. 

Jordan 

Seismic network; remote sensing. 

Korea 

Sedimentary basin analysis; groundwater evaluations; Antarctic research. 

Mexico 

Border mapping cooperation and 

information exchange; structure and 

mineralization of the Sonoran Desert. 

New Zealand 

1:50,000-scale mapping in McMurdo 

Sound of Antarctica. 

Norway 

Digital sonar images data processing. 

Pakistan 

Coal resources exploration and assessment; regional framework studies; 

institutional modernization of Geological Survey of Pakistan. 

Panama 

Earthquake hazards mitigation; humid 

regions hydrology. 

Portugal 

Massive sulfide deposits in the Iberian 

pyrite belt. 

82 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Saudi Arabia 

Mineral resources assessment and data 

base; geographic and geologic cartography; geochemistry and geophysics; 

Landsat image maps; seismic network; 

strengthening of the earth sciences 

community. 

Senegal 

Ground-water modeling and data network. 

Spain 

Ground-water geochemistry and flow 

systems; remote sensing for mineral 

deposits; earthquake research; marine 

geology of continental margins; waterresources management and pollution 

reduction; gold-alunite deposits; 

hydrochemistry in Canary Islands. 

Suriname 

Ground-water modeling. 

Turkey 

Marine geology training course. 

United Arab Emirates 

Ground-water resources assessment of 

Abu Dhabi; remote sensing image 

maps. 

United Kingdom 

GLORIA seafloor sonar imaging surveys; Antarctica remote-sensing image 

mapping and geographic information 

systems. 

USSR 

Earthquake prediction; estimation of 

seismic risk and seismic sources; 

marine mineral resources; global 

change; Arctic permafrost; Antarctic 

research; research-personnel 

exchanges. 

Venezuela 

Geologic mapping and mineral resources assessment of the Guyana 


shield; erosion rates and sediment 


composition of the Orinoco River. 


Yugoslavia 

Soils surveys; geochemical exploration 

methods; seismology and earthquake 

hazards; granite metamorphic complexes; remote sensing; coal quality. 

Programs in which activities were 

conducted under multilateral agreements 

in FY 1989 included the following: 

• International Strategic Minerals 

Inventory, cooperative studies by USGS 

and U.S. Bureau of Mines with Australia, 

Canada, West Germany, South Africa, 

and the United Kingdom to develop a 

global assessment of strategic commodities including cobalt, nickel, platinum, 

titanium, and tin. 

• Global Seismic Network, the generation of a comprehensive, unrestricted 

seismic data base for fundamental earthquake monitoring and research (150 stations in 54 countries). 

• Famine Early Warning System, 

(FEWS), the application of geographic 

information systems to target populations 

at risk of famine in eight sub-Saharan 

and Horn of Africa countries: 

Mauritania, Mali, Burkina, Niger, Chad, 

Sudan, Ethiopia, and Mozambique. 

• AGRYMET, identification of remote 

sensing data requirements to make agricultural, hydrological, and meteorological 

assessments in nine west African countries: Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, 

Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde, Mali, Niger, 

Burkina, and Chad. 

• Grasshopper and locust habitat identification and monitoring by remote sensing in Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, 

and Sudan. (See article on p. 69.) 

• Antarctic research including acquisition of seismic and other geophysical 

data, geodetic data, aerial photography, 

and satellite imagery to produce base 

maps and to assess changes due to global 

change in the glaciers and ice sheets comprising the margin of Antarctica; multinational crustal transect studies; operation of the Scientific Committee on 

Antarctic Research's (SCAR) Library for 

Cartography and Geodesy; seismology 

and data telecommunications at the 

South Pole; ice-cap motions, sea-ice monitoring; ice-penetrating radar surveys; 

biochemistry of lakes. 

• Interagency Volcano Early Warning 

Disaster Assistance Program provides for 

emergency responses worldwide to crises 

related to volcanic eruptions. (See article 

on Galeras Workshop, p. 75.) 

• Advisory consultations, particularly in 

resource assessment methodologies, to 

intergovernmental geoscience organizations in eastern Asia; preparation of 

regional base maps at 1:2,000,000 scale 

covering approximately 12 million square 

miles. 

• Circum-Pacific Mapping Project, program coordination and the cartographic 

preparation of about 60 thematic maps. 

• Southwestern Pacific offshore exploration for petroleum resources. 

• Ground-water modeling, Senegal 

River Basin, Senegal and Mauritania. 

International Activities 83 
• Advisory coordination and training in 

coastal geologic hazards and resources 

assessments in the western-southwestern 

Pacific. 

• Technical expertise provided to agencies of the United Nations as requested: 

Gold geology and chemistry (Turkey); 

gamma-ray spectrometry (Cameroon); 

installation of geophysical computer programs (China); geotechnical measurements on unconsolidated sediments 

(China); marine geology workshop (Turkey); geoscientific studies of the South 

Pacific (Fiji); design and implementation 

of computerized hydrologic data bases 

(India); ground-water modeling (Suriname). 

• Technical expertise provided to member nations of the Pan American Institute 

of Geography and History (PAIGH) 

through the Commissions on Cartography and Geophysics as requested; remote 

sensing applications (Bolivia); onshoreoffshore mapping (Central American 

nations). 

84 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Information Systems Activities 


Mission 

The Information Systems Division 

provides support and services to 

the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, to major programs in each 

division of the USGS, to the Department 

of the Interior, and to other government 

agencies on information technology and 

automated data processing (ADP). The 

Division operates the USGS's mainframe 

computer located in Reston, Va., and 

Technology Information Centers and 

minicomputers in four ADP Service Centers nationwide. The Division assists users 

in acquiring ADP and telecommunications hardware, software, and services; 

coordinates and improves information 

systems through systems analysis and 

design; provides user education and 

assistance; and conducts research into 

better ways to use computer technology 

to solve mission-related problems. The 

Division coordinates, manages, and operates voice, data, and radio communications for the USGS, including GEONET, 

the data communications network of the 

Department of the Interior, from which 

gateways provide access to other national 

networks and supercomputer systems. 

Highlights 

Earth-Science Data 

Search Solution 

By C.R. Baskin 

Researchers and scientists, managers 

and planners alike are increasingly finding the solution to their search for 

sources of earth-science data in the Earth 

Science Data Directory (ESDD). Operational since 1985, ESDD now involves a 

large community of participants—both 

contributors and users—who find the 

directory a useful source and outlet of 

information for a variety of projects, 

everything from global change and polar 

research to industrial site development. 

Not only does ESDD deliver information from a U.S. Geological Survey 

mainframe computer about the location 

of a data source, but it also provides considerable descriptive material about the 

source of that data. Because ESDD can 

be accessed from almost any local computer terminal equipped with a modem 

and telecommunications software, and 

because its powerful, menu-guided 

search features make it extremely easy to 

use, it is easy to understand the rapid 

growth in its use. The availability of the 

ESDD on compact disk since mid-1988 

has extended its use to an even broader 

community. 

A substantial subset of the ESDD is 

the Arctic Environmental Data Directory 

(AEDD). Now that AEDD is expanding 

to include information about Antarctica, 

it will aid scientists and researchers who 

are concerned with polar processes at 

both poles and the relation of these processes to global change. The AEDD is 

being used to provide a connection 

between polar scientists and global 

change data sets through a shared 

"interoperable directory," created for the 

U.S. Global Change Research Program 

by the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration, the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, the 

National Science Foundation, and the 

USGS. The "interoperable directory" 

allows researchers to tap the complete 

coverage of the directories of all of these 

agencies by simply querying any one 

agency directory. Among many others, 

AEDD data sets include those relating to 

sea ice, polar mammals, marine life, 

Arctic soils, mean snow depth, climate, 

Information Systems Activities 85 
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

EARTH SCIENCE DATA DIRECTORY (ESDD) 

ESDD Locates Data Sources 

WORLDWIDE DATA SOURCES WORLDWIDE DATA USE 

Direct 

Access 

Users NOAA

CENTRALIZED 


INFORMATION 


CARTOGRAPHY 
 REPOSITORY 

HYDROLOGY 


Global Change 


Master 
 NASA GEOLOGY Directory (MD) 

(Shared By All Users) 

ARCTIC 

IGLOBAL CHANGE 

International 

and other 

Directories 

USGS Amdahl 5890 stores and delivers references to earth-science and natural-resource 

data. 

geology, oceanography, glaciology, 

remote sensing, and terrestrial ecosystems. 

In today's fast-paced world, of earthscience and natural-resource research, 

developmental planning, and environmental monitoring projects, a geographic 

information system is often an essential 

component in problem solving. Over 

one-fourth of the respondents to a 1988 

ESDD user survey, for example, indicated that the directory had helped them 

to locate data for use in a geographic 

information system. One respondent 

said, "It has allowed us to view what 

other data are available for the State for 

future use." The ESDD is a mechanism 

having many users who will be increasingly better served as the directory continues to grow. ESDD contains more than 

2,000 references to data from over 200 

sources. System users—more than 150 

authorized online—are located in all 

parts of the country and include all levels 

of government, the university community, and the private sector. Coverage has 

been extended to include sources in 

every State. New sources of references 

and new users of ESDD are continually 

being sought by the USGS in order to 

develop an even more effective solution 

to the researcher's quest for reliable and 

accessible earth-science data. 

Local Area 

Networking at the U.S. 

Geological Survey 

By Kathleen Schabacker 

The number of USGS scientists, 

administrators, and support personnel 

who are using local area networking technology has grown rapidly over the past 

several years. A local area network (LAN) 

is an excellent method for sharing both 

information and computing resources. It 

is a communications network whose components are located within a relatively 

small geographic area (for example, 

within a building) and are tied together 

via telecommunications wiring so that all 

components are physically accessible to 

all other components. Examples of the 

components that can be linked together 

are personal computers, workstations, file 

"servers," printers, and mini- and mainframe computers. A file server can be a 

microprocessor having storage capacity 

to store sharable data files; the printer 

could be a high-quality laser printer to 

which all the LAN users can direct output. With a LAN, users can enjoy the 

convenience of a desktop processor and 

at the same time benefit from equipment 

that provides the power of mainframe 

processing, the sharing of data and information, and the quality of expensive 

laser printers without duplication of 

equipment. 

Different hardware specifications 

(for example, Ethernet, Appletalk) and 

software protocol standards [for example, 

Transmission Control Protocol/Internet 

Protocol (TCP/IP), Xerox Network Services (XNS)] exist that can be combined 

to create a LAN. Successful implementation is the result of much analysis and 

planning. For this reason, the USGS has 

begun to define local area networking 

policies and guidelines so that users can 

more easily procure and implement the 

most applicable hardware and software 

for their needs. 

Local area networks can also be 

interconnected, which makes them even 

more powerful and accessible as shared 

resources. Geographically dispersed 

areas can be connected via long distance 

86 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
telecommunications links (wide area networking); in the case of the USGS, many 

of the local area network facilities (GEOLAN) are connected via the wide area 

network facility (GEONET). Procurements for new computer systems, such as 

the Department of Interiorwide Distributed Information Systems II procurement that provides high performance 

information systems and services to satisfy a multitude of departmental needs, 

now specify LAN capabilities. 

. . . the USGS has begun 

to define local area networking policies and 

guidelines so that users 

can more easily procure 

and implement the most 

applicable hardware and 

software for their needs. 

Different hardware and software can 

reside on different LANs. To allow these 

different systems to talk to one another, 

specialized equipment such as "gateways" 

can connect networks that use different 

communications software protocols, and 

"repeaters" can connect networks that 

use different physical media. "Routers" 

are available to send data across a network in the most efficient way, and 

"bridges" are used to filter and forward 

data across a network. 

Local area networks exist at many 

USGS sites across the country. The 

National Coal Resources Database System, the many geographic information 

systems being used, the distributed information systems of water-resources information, and the Federal Financial System 

of the Department are just a few of the 

major applications that use local area networking. Because of the flexibility that 

LANs afford, the USGS has begun development of a network system that is truly 

capable of sharing information and 

resources throughout the USGS. 

Generating Color 

Separations of 

Geologic Maps on 

Low-Cost Computer 

Systems 

By Alex Acosta and 

Janet Barrett 

Geologic maps are the basic tools by 

which scientists, planners, and managers 

can study the rocks and structure beneath the surface of the Earth and other 

planets. These maps allow scientists to 

see the planet as it would appear with 

all the overlying materials stripped away 

to reveal the layers of rock below. To 

portray the complex structure of these 

buried rock layers, geologic maps are 

produced in multiple colors. 

Color separations for printing these 

geologic maps may be generated by using 

manual or computerized methods. The 

manual method is labor-intensive and 

time-consuming and requires several 

photographic products. The computerized procedure requires few photographic products to prepare a map for 

scanning. In the computerized procedure, manual steps include preparing the 

geologist's original compilation, editing 

the scanned version of the map, tagging 

polygons, and doing some color coding. 

The computerized procedure helps to 

reduce or eliminate materials, labor, 

time, and registration errors. 

As part of a productivity enhancement effort begun in 1989, USGS computer scientists are experimenting with a 

procedure on a general-purpose computer to produce the necessary color separations for printing geologic maps. The 

computer scientists are also developing a 

procedure using a low-cost personal computer that will make this capability available to field geologists. With this procedure, field geologists will be able to do 

more detailed processing of their original 

field work on their own computers. 

Information Systems Activities 87 
Figure 1. Author's original line 

drawing on a shaded-relief base 

map of Mars. This is a photographically enlarged subarea of 

the original. North is to the top. 

Figure 2. A photographically 

reduced version of a yellow 

color separation. The gradation 

in gray-tone exemplified by this 

version of the original is 

induced by the limits in the 

eye's resolving power to detect 

the varying dot patterns. Lighttoned areas would be covered 

with yellow ink in the printed 

map. 

88 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Figure 3. A computerized peelcoat. The areas of all polygons 

have been filled with corresponding tag values. Openwindow negatives are generated 

by assignment of tag values in 

the computer. 

Figure 4. A colored geologic 

map. The computerized peelcoat was interactively colored to 

produce this product. 

Information Systems Activities 89 
Parallel Processing— 

Powerful Tool for the 

Earth Sciences 

By Rick MacDonald 

The complex processes of nature, 

the still mysterious forces at work deep 

beneath the Earth, and the puzzling phenomena of natural hazards are excellent 

candidates for the applications of new 

computer technologies. Earth science has 

the wide range and complexity of disciplines that challenge the leading edge of 

computer technology. Each new research 

venture in earth science demands more 

and more computing resources. Research 

interests that can benefit from better 

computational tools include projects in 

geology, hydrology, seismology, volcanology, geochemistry, geography, and cartography. Much can be learned, for 

example, from constructing dynamic 

computer models of the core and mantle 

of the Earth, which allows an unprecedented insight into the forces that drive 

the Earth's tectonic plates. Other computer models can predict how toxic and 

radioactive contaminants behave as they 

travel in ground-water systems. Threedimensional geographic information systems, which can be used to integrate 

almost infinite permutations and combinations of geologic, hydrologic, and topoEach new research 

venture in earth science 

demands more and more 

computing resources. 

graphic information, allow scientists to 

analyze relations among the Earth's properties and to understand better the processes at work. 

Supercomputers are one of the exciting new and developing technologies that 

can provide the data-handling resources 

to unlock the mysteries of the Earth's 

processes. Newer supercomputers employ 

a wide variety of "architectures", including scalar, vector, parallel, vector-parallel, 

and massively parallel. Scalar and vector 

architectures are familiar to most earth 

and computer scientists—these are the 

more standard computing environments 

that use conventional programming and 

a sequential processor in analyzing data. 

Parallelism, however, introduces a 

high degree of complexity into the effective use of computers. One reason is that 

sufficient software tools have not been 

developed for parallel processors. Also, 

scientists have been trained to view computers as sequential processors and to 

program them accordingly. Also, because 

scientists have viewed computers as only 

sequential machines, they have been slow 

to conceptualize the mathematical algorithms that would help them to solve 

problems more effectively through parallel processing. 

Parallel Processing 

Parallelism in computer systems is 

not a new concept. Operating systems 

have been designed for years with the 

capability for either simulated or actual 

parallel operation. Forms of parallelism 

have been considered in hardware design 

ever since the early days of computers. 

Parallelism has been defined as "a collection of processing elements that can communicate and cooperate to solve large 

problems fast." Parallel processing systems can be characterized by the number 

of processor elements (CPU's) that it has, 

how much memory it has, how the memory is distributed, how the processor elements communicate, what form of interconnection network it possesses, and how 

the processor elements are synchronized. 

Some examples of parallelism are as 

follows: 

• Timesharing—Multiple users are 

served by a computer, allowing more 

than one user at the same time to access 

the computer. 

• Batch processing—Multiple jobs share 

time on a single processor. 

• Multiprocessing—Multiple jobs are distributed among independent processors. 

• Vectorization — Identical computations 

on elements in an array are performed 

simultaneously by using specialized 

hardware. 

90 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
• Multiple functional units—Computation is shared between functional units 

designed to work in parallel within the 

same processor. 

• Pipelining—Parts of one computation 

overlap parts of the previous computation when they use different hardware 

resources. 

• Concurrentization—A single job is programmed to run on multiple processors 

in parallel. 

The cost of circuitry has inhibited, 

until recently, the use of more parallelism in computer architectures. But with 

the cost of hardware components undergoing dramatic reductions, parallelism 

has become a viable solution to the problem of speeding up computer systems. 

Since the ultimate limitations to how fast 

a computer can be run are controlled by 

the natural laws of physics, parallelism 

may be the only way to increase the 

speeds of computers. 

USGS Activities in Parallel 

Processing 

The USGS has begun several projects to explore the potential benefits 

of parallel processing in the earth sciences. For example, a project is underway in which fundamental earth-science 

algorithms such as fluid flow through 

porous media and development of evenly 

spaced data grids from randomly dispersed satellite data of the Earth's surface are being examined in a generic parallel processing architecture. Much 

already has been published about the 

mathematical algorithms that are used in 

sequential processing of earth-science 

data. The new USGS project is examining methods and techniques that enable 

scientists to apply the algorithms to general parallel processing platforms. In this 

way, a knowledge base will be established 

that will form the kernel for future parallel processing efforts in the USGS. 

As industry continues to incorporate 

this kind of architecture, more and more 

so-called general-purpose computers can 

be expected to take on the advanced 

characteristics of leading edge platforms 

that use parallel processing. Thus, knowledge about how these architectures can 

be used most effectively in earth-science 

research will be necessary. 

Information Systems Activities 91 
Administrative and Facilities 


The John Wesley Powell Federal 

Building, Reston, Va. (Photograph by Dave Usher.) 

Support 

Mission 

The Administrative Division provides administrative direction and 

coordination in support of the 

scientific and technical programs of the 

U.S. Geological Survey. This support 

includes policy guidance and program 

direction and provides leadership and 

authority for various administrative management and technical support functions, 

including personnel, manpower utilization, finance, administrative management 

systems, management analysis, records 

management, procurement and contract 

negotiation, property and facilities management, motor vehicle management, 

security, and safety. The Division also 

manages the development, maintenance, 

and operation of the financial management system for the entire Department 

of the Interior. These functions are 

carried out at the National Center in 

Reston, Va., and through Regional Management Offices in Denver, Colo., and 

Menlo Park, Calif. 

Highlights 

Credit Card Sales and 

Bankcards for Small 

Purchase Procurement 

By Charlotte H. Goodson, 

Wendy R. Hassibe,1 and 

Betty B. Brodes 

As part of a continuing effort to use 

technology advances in automation in the 

areas of financial management, the U.S. 

Geological Survey is testing two unique 

programs for the use of bankcards and 

credit cards. These innovative initiatives 

include credit card sales to the general 

public for USGS products and the use of 

bankcards by Federal employees for 

small purchase procurements. 

Credit Card Sales 

The USGS offers a multitude of cartographic products and book reports for 

sale at 19 offices throughout the United 

States. These products include aerial 

photographs, topographic maps, mineral 

and energy resource maps, satellite 

images, selected separate sheets for the 

National Atlas, scientific reports, and 

many other products of interest to the 

general public and specialized users. The 

USGS began using credit cards for sales 

during fiscal year 1989 with the idea of 

improving service to its many customers. 

Because the USGS had been considering the use of bank-cards for several 

years, the bureau was ready when the 

Treasury Department offered support in 

Of the National Mapping Division. 

92 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
...credit card sales have 

resulted in a six-percent 

increase in revenue. 

providing governmentwide contracts for 

credit card services from financial institutions. The USGS evaluated four financial 

institutions before selecting the Mellon 

Bank to provide Visa and MasterCard 

sales and then worked together in 

implementing procedures to track the 

financial data from the point of sale to 

inclusion on internal and external financial reports. Not only has the credit card 

option improved customer service and 

been a great convenience to the public, 

credit card sales have resulted in a sixpercent increase in revenue. 

The Use of Bankcards for Small 

Purchase Transactions 

The Federal Government uses simplified, or small purchase procedures for 

the procurement of goods and services 

totaling $25,000 or less. At the USGS, 

the majority of these small purchases are 

accomplished by written purchase orders, 

authorized cash transactions, and orders 

placed against agreements negotiated 

with small businesses. 

To streamline small purchase procedures, the USGS initiated a pilot bankcard project in fiscal year 1989 utilizing 

the Department of Commerce Bankcard 

system. For the pilot program, approximately 90 bankcards were issued to personnel in the Southeast Region District 

Offices of the Water Resources Division. 

The use of bankcards for official 

purchases is expected to provide purchasing and project personnel with an 

efficient and cost-effective procurement 

method. Bankcards may be used for 

over-the-counter and telephone order 

transactions in much the same way as 

personal credit cards. Merchants accepting the card for Government purchases 

collect payment from the Federal Government through channels established by 

the credit card company and the parent 

bank. 

Cardholders are authorized to use 

bankcards within the limits stated in their 

Delegation of BankCard Authority and 

consistent with all applicable procurement regulations. Transactions are reviewed and approved by an approving 

official and are subject to review by the 

Office of Procurement and Contracts, the 

Office of Financial Management, or 

other reviewing authorities. 

In fiscal year 1990, bureauwide 

implementation of the bankcard program 

is anticipated under the Federal Supply 

Schedule contract awarded by the General Services Administration to Rocky 

Mountain Bankcard Systems, Inc. 

Business and 

Economic 

Development 

Program 

By Betty B. Brodes 

The U.S. Congress has enacted several programs that utilize the federal 

procurement process to directly assist 

small and small, disadvantaged businesses 

in obtaining awards of federal contracts. 

The USGS supports these programs 

through its efforts to achieve the Business and Economic Development Program (BEDP) goals that are established 

annually in conjunction with the Department of the Interior. 

The USGS was selected to receive 

the Department of the Interior's Unit 

Award for Excellence of Service during 

fiscal year 1989. This award is presented 

annually by the Secretary of the Interior 

to a bureau or office that either meets or 

exceeds each of its business and economic 

development program goals. The USGS 

not only met, but exceeded its fiscal year 

1989 small business, minority business, 

women-oriented business, and labor surplus area set-aside program goals. These 

annual goals represent a percentage of 

the total procurement dollars and are 

based on historical data and advance procurement plans. The success was a result 

of continuing positive efforts on the part 

Administrative and Facilities Support 93 
Secretary of the Interior, Manuel Lujan, Jr., presenting the Minority Entrepreneur of the 

Year Award to Dorothy J. White, President, Miracle Cleaning Services, Inc. Under Secretary, Frank A. Bracken, offers congratulations at the award ceremony held on October 

16, 1989. (Photograph by Tami A. Heilemann.) 

of contracting and project personnel to 

identify new opportunities for BEDP participation in USGS programs. 

In a related accomplishment, for the 

second consecutive year, a USGS nominee was selected to receive the Department's Minority Entrepreneur of the 

Year Award. Secretary Lujan presented 

this year's award to Miracle Cleaning Services, Inc., in recognition of excellence of 

performance in janitorial and trash 

removal services at the National Center. 

Miracle Cleaning Services was chosen 

from other small, disadvantaged businesses who have provided outstanding 

service to Interior offices and bureaus. 

As another example of efforts to 

expand small business procurement, a 

cooperative effort between Business and 

Economic Development Specialists and 

USGS personnel in all Water Resources 

Division District Offices has resulted in 

increased representation in small and 

small, disadvantaged business conferences that are sponsored by congressional 

delegations, civic organizations, and other 

government agencies. This outreach 

activity provides information about USGS 

programs to the small and minorityowned business community and identifies 

these firms as potential suppliers of 

USGS activities. 

Administrative 

Automation 

By Eliot J. Christian 

People, funds, facilities, and equipment all are needed to carry out the scientific research and technical programs 

of the USGS. The administrative management of these resources throughout 

the USGS is a cooperative effort in financial management, personnel services, 

facilities management, property management, safety and improvement efforts, 

and administrative systems management. 

Automation is becoming an increasingly 

critical factor in accomplishing the management of resources within applicable 

laws and regulations—at the lowest possible cost. 

Automation efforts have been proceeding on two levels: A Strategic Initiative aimed at large scale automated applications affecting whole organizations, and 

an Office Automation Initiative aimed at 

enhancing the productivity of individuals. 

Strategic Initiative 

Enhancing administrative processing 

through automation is a major focus of 

efforts to help USGS managers to manage resources efficiently. Four strategic 

goals with respect to administrative automation are currently being pursued: 

• Automated administrative systems 

should be easily accessible to all who 

need them. 

• An electronic flow of information 

should replace paper processing wherever possible. 

• Administrative procedures should be 

streamlined and standardized. 

• A high level of integration among 

administrative systems should exist. 

Automated Administrative Systems 

Should be Accessible. The intent is to 

design administrative Automated Data 

Processing (ADP) applications that are 

both effective and easy to use, especially 

with an eye toward encouraging use of 

efficient, USGS-wide systems rather than 

redundant, independent systems. While 

working toward a full range of automation support for administrative process94 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
ing, it is recognized that no one set of 

centrally maintained systems can serve all 

the needs of all the users at all detail levels needed. Given that a measure of local 

administrative processing is appropriate 

and desirable, a major challenge is to 

design centralized processes so that they 

either can stand alone or can complement a range of distributed processes. 

Toward that end, administrative information databases are being placed in a central repository that is readily accessible to 

all users. The USGS is also pursuing (1) 

standard telecommunications interfaces 

that will make it easier to share information and (2) increased software compatibility among the various administrative 

systems. By so doing, a foundation is 

being laid for integrating more fully the 

various USGS automated applications 

that can share common databases. 

An Electronic Flow of Information 

Should Replace Paper Processing Wherever Possible. One aspect of administrative processing that has already been a 

prime candidate for increased efficiency 

is the handling of information that is 

represented on paper. Since it is often 

the case that much of this information is 

eventually transformed into a machinereadable form, one goal is to move that 

data entry function as close as possible to 

the source of the information. Replacing 

the paper flow of information with electronic information at the earliest point in 

an automated system is a less costly way 

to move information, and it also can help 

to reduce data being entered more than 

once and improve the reliability of the 

data. 

The first step is to identify the information being moved and the paths by 

which it flows. In classic system analysis 

style, a given set of work processes is broken down to reveal where information 

may be needlessly generated or handled 

inefficiently, and from this analysis a new 

set of processes is designed. However, a 

problem with this approach occurs when 

work areas are handled separately. If a 

system is defined too narrowly at the outset, a specific work area may be improved internally, but it will not be 

apparent how that island of automation 

can be connected to others or how the 

approach used could be applied in other 

areas. As a consequence, opportunities 

for improving the flow of information 

<Donations> 


<Purchases> ACCOUNTABLE 
 OFFICER 


RECORDS 


<Value> INITIAL 


ACQUISITION 


<Excess> 
 •�
 PROPERTY 


RECORDS 
 <Transfers> 
 04�
 

<Reports> 


04 UTILIZATION 


<Vehicle 


Utilization 
 Data> 
 •

<Vehicle Utilization 


�
 

Data> 


UTILIZATION 
 RECORDS 


can be missed entirely. Recognizing the 

need for a broad and unified approach, 

efforts are underway to comprehensively 

analyze internal administrative procedures and to produce a model of administrative information processing. 

Administrative Procedures Should 

be Streamlined and Standardized. 

Streamlining and standardizing procedures are keyed to meeting the USGS's 

needs for administrative services with a 

minimum of burden. As part of this 

effort, an ongoing review of administrative systems is in use throughout the 

Bureau to identify opportunities for 

streamlining operations and eliminating 

duplication. One recent review in this 

program focused on personnel systems 

and generated several specific recommendations that are now being pursued. 

The paperless processing in the USGS of 

Requests for Personnel Action (Standard 

Form 52) is an outgrowth of this effort. 

At a basic level, the challenge to 

streamline and standardize administrative 

procedures demands that information 

requirements first be reduced to their 

barest essentials. Efforts are underway to 

develop an administrative information 

processing model that will help to identify what information must be delivered 

by the users served and what information 

can be made available to those users. 

Administrative Systems Should be 

Highly Integrated. Without a high level 

of integration among administrative 

systems, users can be burdened with 

<Reports> 


<Vehicle Data> 
 TRACKING 00 
 AND CONTROL • J' (Inventories> 

HISTORY 


RECORDS 


<Inventories> 


• 


<Value> 


DISPOSITION 


<Reports> 


<Excess> 


Property management level 

data-flow diagram. One of the 

tools that is used in building an 

Information Model. 

Administrative and Facilities Support 95 
confusing procedures for providing 

information and could receive information that is arrayed piecemeal instead of 

in a concise form. A related concern is 

that gaps between what should be related 

systems make for more internal work 

than would be necessary to achieve the 

same end result. Since highly integrated 

systems are also more easily maintained 

than separate or discrete systems, a 

strong incentive clearly exists to integrate 

administrative systems wherever possible. 

The recent creation of two Departmental Administrative Service Centers, 

one hosted by the USGS and one hosted 

by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), was 

a major step toward integration among 

administrative systems. The USGS has 

the lead role in the financial management area, represented by the comprehensive Federal Financial System just 

implemented this year; BOR has the lead 

role in the area of Personnel and Payroll 

Processing. The systems are also targeted 

by the Office of Management and Budget as model systems with application 

throughout the Federal Government. 

Since the Federal Financial System is able 

to be expanded into additional administrative functional areas, such as procurement and property management, USGS 

leadership in this system presents a real 

opportunity for enhancing integration 

among administrative systems. 

Office Automation Initiative 

In addition to working on broadbased ADP applications that affect the 

whole USGS, the Administrative Division 

has implemented minicomputer applications that provide automation support 

for internal administrative processes. 

Three minicomputer systems in operation at USGS regional centers in Reston, 

Va., Denver, Colo., and Menlo Park, 

Calif., are linked via GEONET, a nationwide data communications system, forming a network having very advanced 

capabilities, including a true distributed 

database. Two of the major applications 

implemented during fiscal year 1989 on 

these minicomputers are the Property 

Management System and the Procurement Management Information System. 

One advantage gained from conversion 

of the Property Management System to 

this network of minicomputers is support 

for on-line processing and editing of 

data, which in turn improves the quality 

and timeliness of property data and 

reduces the amount of time needed to 

respond to inquiries. USGS employees 

can now access information and generate 

reports for selected data in the property 

database, thereby reducing the need for 

duplicate systems within the Bureau. The 

new Procurement Management Information System provided additional flexibility. Used to track and report on contract, 

grant, and purchasing workload, it has 

been making special reporting needs and 

adaptation to changing requirements 

much easier to accomplish. 

Understanding the problems that 

arise when offices have incompatible 

automated systems, the Administrative 

Division set out to build a cohesive system for office automation divisionwide 

that would also accommodate connection 

with systems in the other USGS divisions. 

Consequently, the division standardized 

word processing, electronic mail, and 

other computing activities throughout all 

offices by using the MS-DOS based personal computer (PC) as a standard. This 

PC-based office automation approach has 

allowed for a fully compatible set of 

equipment and software that covers a 

wide range of needs, ranging from Computer Aided Design (CAD) systems and 

software engineering to desktop publishing, as well as document preparation and 

distribution. 

PC-based local area networks have 

been established at Headquarters and 

regional centers to tie together office 

automation capabilities. The use of local 

area networks at USGS regional centers 

has permitted the local sharing of printers and large capacity disk drives, and 

also provides for common electronic filing. By connecting these networks 

together via GEONET, the local networks further support the sharing of 

information in electronic form. Each 

site's local area network also has telecommunications gateway facilities to allow 

employees at all sites to access the Division's networked minicomputers and 

other USGS computer systems. Recently, 

Compact Disk Read Only Memory (CDROM) servers have been placed on the 

network so that each user can have 

immediate desktop access to many 

96 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
billions of characters of information 

organized with sophisticated search and 

retrieval software. 

Examples of recent applications of 

automation support to a variety of 

administrative tasks include: 

• Computer Aided Design (CAD) systems using the AutoCAD software on 

networked personal computers are now 

installed and operational in USGS regional and headquarters offices. Users 

enter architectural drawings of the buildings into the system and are able to 

accommodate changes as needed. Not 

only does the handling of construction 

drawings with CAD yield a better product at a lower cost, the new system 

also helps improve standardization of 

information. 

• The new Automated Solicitation and 

Contract Preparation system allows for 

the rapid generation of solicitation and 

contract documents tailored to the 

requirements of a specific acquisition. 

Sophisticated information processing and 

document assembly form the heart of the 

system, supplemented by relevant information from the Federal Acquisition 

Regulations. From the client perspective, 

this system helps reduce the lead time 

necessary to issue a solicitation document 

and also improves the quality of contract 

documents. 

• Building maintenance can also be 

scheduled and tracked via computer, 

using an off-the-shelf PC-based software 

package. 

• New PC-based software supports a 

paperless system for the collection, calculation, and transmission of time and attendance information. The system was 

developed based on a system available 

from the Department of Commerce and 

pilot tested by the Administrative Division. The system is now being tested 

in other USGS divisions and in other 

agencies. 

Administrative and Facilities Support 97 
U.S. Geological 

Survey Yearbook 1989 

ORGANIZATION OF THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

WATER RESOURCES DIVISION 


Chief Hydrologist 


Associate Choi Hydrologist 


AssisteM Chief Hydrologist Assistant Chief Hydrologist 

for Operations for Scientific Information 

Mansgement 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist 

for Research and External Assistant Chief Hydrologist 

Coordination for Program Coordination 

and Technical Support Offices 

Hydrologic Research Offices_ 

External Research Atmospheric Deposition 

Analysis 

Ground Water 

Surface Water 

Aulstant Chief Hydrologist Water Duality

for Water Assessment end 

Data Coordination 

Office 


Water Data Coordination 


Regional Offices 

Northeastern • Reston, VA 

Southeastern • Atlanta. GA 

Central • Denver, CO 

Western • Menlo Park, CA 

District Offices 

ASSISTANT DIRECTORS 

Engineering Geology 

Programs 

Administration 

Research 

Information Systems 

Intergovernmental Affairs 

NATIONAL MAPPING DIVISION 

Chief 

Associate Chief 

Assistant Division Chief Asalatant Division Chief 

for Program. Budget for Coordination and 

and Administration Requirements 

Offices Offices 


Budget and Program External Coordination 


Development Information Resource 


Strategic Analysis Management 


Administration International Activities 


Fiscal Control 


Assistant Division Chief 

Assistant Division Chief for information and 

for Production Data Services 

Management Offices 

_Offices Earth Science 

Production Penning and Information 

Analyse Product Distribution 

Production and Policy 

Management Systems Publications Liaison and 

Production Contract Review 

Management 

Assistant Division Chief 


for Research 


Offices 


Geographic and 


Cartographic Research 


Systems Development 


Technical Management 


Field Centers 

Eastern Mapping • Reston, VA 

Mid-Continent Mapping • Rolla, MO 

Rocky Mountain Mapping • Denver, CO 

Western Mapping • Menlo Park, CA 

EROS Data - Sioux Falls, SD 

DIRECTOR 

Associste Director 

STAFF OFFICES 

Washington Liaison 


Equal Employment 


Opportunity 


Congressional Liaison 


Public Affairs 


1 

INFORMATION SYSTEMS 

DIVISION 

Chief Geologist 

Associate Chief Geologist 

GEOLOGIC DIVISION 

Chief 

Associate Chief Assistant Chief Geologist for 

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION 

Chef 

Offices 

d

Financial Management 

Facilities and Management 

Services 

Systems Management 

Personnel 

Procurement and Contracts 

H Administrative Servo. Center 

Management Offices 

Central • Denver. CO 

Western • Menlo Park. CA 

Office of Scientific 


Publications 


Branches 

Eastern Technical Reports 

Central Technical Reports 

Western Technical Reports 

Library and Information 

Services 

Visual Services 

Office of Energy and Marine 

Geology 

Branches 

Coal Geology 

Petroleum Geology 

Sedimentary Processes 

Pacific Marine Geology 

Atlantic Marine Geology 

Office of Mineral Resources 

Branches 

Alaskan Geology 

Eastern Mineral Resources 

Central Mineral Resources 

Western Mineral Resources 

Geochemistry 

Geophysics 

Resource Analysis 

Program 

H Policy. Planning and Office of International Geology I Coordination Staff 

Assistant Chief Geologists 

Eastern Region 

Central Region 

Western Region 

Office of Regional Geology 

Branches 

Eastern Regional Geology 

Central Regional Geology 

Western Regional Geology 

Isotope Geology 

Paleontology and Stratigraphy 

Astrogeology 

Office of Ewthquakes. Volcanoes, 

and Engineering 

Branches 

Tectonophyscs 

Engineering Seismology and 

Geology 

Seismology 

Geologic Risk Assessment 

Global Seismology and 

Geomagnetism 

Igneous and Geothermal 

Processes 

Olt tces_ 

Management Services 

Customer Services 

Computer end 

Communications Services 

Office of Field Services 

Centers 


Denver. CO 


Menlo Park, CA 


Flagstaff, AZ 

Guide to U.S. 

Geological Survey 

Information and 

Publications 

To buy maps of all areas of the United States and 

to request USGS catalogs, pamphlets, and leaflets 

(limited quantities free), write or visit: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Distribution Branch 

Building 810 

Denver Federal Center, Box 25286 

Denver, CO 80225 

To buy Alaska maps, residents of Alaska may 

write or visit: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Alaska Distribution Section 

101 12th Avenue, Box 12 

Fairbanks, AK 99701 

To buy USGS book publications, to request USGS 

circulars, or to obtain information on the availability of microfiche or paper-duplicate copies of 

open-file reports, write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Books and Open-File Reports Section 

Federal Center, Box 25425 

Denver, CO 80225 

To get on the mailing list for the monthly list of 

New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey 

(free), write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Distribution Support Section 

582 National Center 

12201 Sunrise Valley Drive 

Reston, VA 22092 

To subscribe to Earthquakes and Volcanoes, a bimonthly, nontechnical, glossy digest that provides 

up-to-date information on earthquakes, volcanoes, 

and related natural hazards around the world, 

write: 

Superintendent of Documents 

Government Printing Office 

Washington, DC 20402 

To obtain information on cartographic data and on 

programs, publications, and services, or to obtain 

copies of reports and maps, write or visit the U.S. 

Geological Survey Earth Science Information Centers at the following addresses: 

Alaska: 

Room 101 

4230 University Dr. 

Anchorage, AK 99508-4664 

Room 113, U.S. Courthouse 

222 W. 7th Ave., #53 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7546 

California: 

Federal Bldg., Room 7638 

300 N. Los Angeles St. 

Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Rm. 3128 


Bldg. 3, Stop 532 


345 Middlefield Rd. 


Menlo Park, CA 94025 


504 Custom House 


555 Battery St. 


San Francisco, CA 94111 


Colorado: 

169 Federal Bldg. 

1961 Stout St. 

Denver, CO 80294 

Room 1813 


Box 25046, Stop 504 


Bldg. 25, Denver Federal Center 


Denver, CO 80225-0046 


District of Columbia: 

Main Interior Bldg., Room 2650 

18th and C Sts., NW 

Washington, DC 20240 

(When visiting, use E St. entrance) 

Mississippi: 

Bldg. 3101 

Stennis Space Center, MS 39529 

Missouri: 

Room 231 

1400 Independence Rd. 

Rolla, MO 65401 

Utah: 

8105 Federal Bldg. 

125 S. State St. 

Salt Lake City, UT 84138 

Virginia: 

1C402 National Center, Stop 507 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 22092 

Washington: 

678 U.S. Courthouse 

W. 920 Riverside Ave. 


Spokane, WA 99201 


To obtain information on aerial photographs and 

satellite and space images, write or visit: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

EROS Data Center 

Sioux Falls, SD 57198 

To obtain assistance in locating sources of water 

data, identifying sites at which data have been collected, and obtaining specific information, write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

National Water Data Exchange 

National Center, Stop 421 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 22092 

To obtain information on ongoing and planned 

water-data acquisition activities of all Federal 

agencies and many non-Federal organizations, 

write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Office of Water Data Coordination 

National Center, Stop 417 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 22092 

To obtain information on water resources in general and about the water resources of specific 

areas of the United States, write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Hydrologic Information Unit 

National Center, Stop 419 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 22092 

To obtain information on geologic topics such as 

earthquakes and volcanoes, energy and mineral 

resources, the geology of specific areas, and geologic maps and mapping, write: 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Geologic Inquiries Group 

National Center, Stop 907 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 22092 

To obtain information on mineral resources, write 

or visit: 

Minerals Information Office* 

Main Interior Bldg., Room 2647 

18th and C Sts., NW 

Washington, DC 20240 

*A joint venture of the U.S. Geological Survey 

and the U.S. Bureau of Mines. 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Minerals Information Office 

do Mackay School of Mines 

University of Nevada - Reno 

Reno, NV 89557-0047 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Minerals Information Office 

Corbett Bldg. 

210 E. 7th Street 

Tucson, AZ 85705 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Minerals Information Office 

656 U.S. Courthouse 

W. 920 Riverside Dr. 

Spokane, WA 99201 

Guide to U.S. Geological Survey Information and Publications 99 
Budget Information 


U.S. Geological Survey budget authority for fiscal year 1989, by appropriation for Surveys, Investigations, and Research 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 

Activity/Subactivity/Program Element 19891 Activity/Subactivity/Program Element 19891 

enacted enacted 

National Mapping, Geography, and Surveys $ 94,235 Geologic and Mineral Resource Surveys and 

Primary Mapping and Revision i 35,379 Mapping-Continued 

Digital Cartography i 13,931 Offshore Geologic Surveys i 26,583 

Small, Intermediate, and Special Mapping 13,302 Offshore Geologic Framework 6 26,583 

Intermediate-Scale Mapping 6 4,378 Water Resources Investigations i 145,321 

Small-Scale and Other Special Mapping6 1,725 National Water Resources Research and Information 

Geographic Information Systems Research and System-Federal Program i 75,600 

Applications 6 2,084 Data Collection and Analysis 6 21,106 

Land Use and Land Cover Mapping6 1,533 National Water Data & Information Access Program . 1,936 

Image Mapping 6 3,582 Coordination of National Water Data Activities 989 

Advanced Cartographic Systems i 17,716 Regional Aquifer Systems Analysis 6 11,069 

Earth Resources Observation Systemsi 8,599 Core Program Hydrologic Research 6 8,682 

Data Production and Dissemination 6 4,160 Improved Instrumentation 6 1,679 

Applications and Research6 4,439 Water Resources Assessment 6 1,371 

Cartographic and Geographic Information 3,808 Toxic Substances Hydrology 6 12,588 

Side-Looking Airborne Radar i 1,500 Nuclear Waste Hydrology 6 3,851 

Geologic and Mineral Resource Surveys and Mapping... 178,199 Acid Rain 6 2,935 

Geologic Hazards Surveys i 48,390 Scientific and Technical Publications6 2,259 

Earthquake Hazards Reduction 6 34,688 National Water-Quality Assessment Program 7,135 

Volcano Hazards 6 11,513 National Water Resources Research and Information 

Landslide Hazards 6 2,189 System-Federal-State Cooperative Program 58,900 

Geologic Framework and Processes i 28,385 Data Collection and Analysis, Areal Appraisals, and 

National Geologic Mapping 6 17,559 Special Studies 6 50,145 

Deep Continental Studies 6 3,062 Water Use 6 3,940 

Geomagnetism 6 1,735 Coal Hydrology 6 4,815 

Climate Change6 1,031 National Water Resources Research and Information 

Coastal Erosion 6 4,998 System-State Research Institutes and Research 

Mineral Resource Surveys i 47,518 Grants Program i 10,821 

National Mineral Resource Assessment Program 24,534 State Water Resources Research Institutes 5,677 

Strategic and Critical Minerals 6 9,717 National Water Resources Research Grants Program . 4,381 

Development of Assessment Techniques 13,267 Program Administration 6 763 

Energy Geologic Surveys i 27,323 General Administration i 16,330 

Evolution of Sedimentary Basins 6 5,277 Executive Direction 6 4,732 

Coal Investigations 6 7,338 Administrative Operations 6 9,960 

Oil and Gas Investigations 6 5,606 Reimbursements to the Department of Labor 1,638 

Oil Shale Investigations 6 586 Facilities i 17,421 

Geothermal Investigations 6 5,909 National Center-Rental Payments to GSA 14,524 

Uranium-Thorium Investigations 6 2,094 National Center-Facilities Management 6 2,897 

World Energy Resource Assessment 6 513 Totali $451,506 

1 Funding shown represents appropriated dollars and does not include reimbursable funding from Federal, State, and other non-Federal sources. 

100 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
U.S. Geological Survey budget for fiscal years 1986 to 1989, by activity and sources of fundsl 

[Dollars in thousands; totals may not add because of rounding] 

Budget activity 1986 1987 1988 1989 

Total i $600,852 $620,585 $662,101 $ 670,897 

Direct program 6 412,667 432,114 448,233 '451,988 

Reimbursable program 6 188,185 188,471 213,868 2218,909 

States, counties, and municipalities 6 59,945 63,088 68,609 69,577 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 12,111 13,667 12,775 14,194 

Other Federal agencies 6 116,129 111,716 132,484 135,138 

National Mapping, Geography, and Surveys i 112,562 118,462 120,845 126,457 

Direct program 6 84,117 88,542 90,541 94,235 

Reimbursable program 6 28,445 29,921 30,304 32,222 

States, counties, and municipalities 6 1,975 1,841 1,579 1,520 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 9,568 10,276 210,021 10,804 

Other Federal agencies 6 16,902 17,804 18,705 19,898 

Geologic and Mineral Resource Surveys and Mappingi 206,463 209,553 224,708 215,882 

Direct program 6 165,585 169,239 177,278 178,329 

Reimbursable program 6 40,878 40,314 46,750 37,553 

States, counties, and municipalities 6 1,320 1,365 1,138 961 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 348 938 368 682 

Other Federal agencies 6 39,210 38,011 45,244 35,910 

Water Resources Investigations i 248,598 254,288 278,380 287,154 

Direct program 6 135,152 142,130 149,471 145,635 

Reimbursable program 6 113,446 112,158 128,910 141,520 

States, counties, and municipalities 6 56,650 59,882 65,893 67,095 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 2,161 2,437 2,354 2,700 

Other Federal agencies 6 54,635 49,839 60,662 71,725 

General Administration i 14,515 18,285 17,746 19,059 

Direct program 6 14,246 17,084 14,684 16,330 

Reimbursable program (Federal)6 269 1,201 3,062 2,729 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 1 1 3 0 

Other Federal agencies 6 268 1,200 3,060 2,729 

Facilities i 13,615 15,109 16,252 17,450 

Direct program 6 13,567 15,067 16,214 17,421 

Reimbursable program 6 48 42 38 29 

Computer services to other accounts i 5,099 4,835 4,804 4,856 

Reimbursable program 6 5,099 4,835 4,804 4,856 

Miscellaneous non-Federal sources 6 33 15 29 7 

Other Federal agencies 6 5,066 4,820 4,775 4,849 

Operation and Maintenance of Quarters i - - - 52 45 38 

Direct program 6 52 45 38 

1 Direct program includes $451,506 for current year, $130 for Contributed Funds, $314 for last year's unobligated balance, and $38 for Operation and Maintenance 

of Quarters. 

2 Includes $7,953 for map receipts previously shown under direct program column. 

U.S. Geological Survey reimbursable funds from other Federal agencies for fiscal years 1986 to 1989, by agency 

[Dollars in thousands] 

Budget activity 1986 1987 1988 1989 

Department of Agriculture 6 2,756 1,247 3,392 3,638 

Department of Commerce 6 104 100 50 0 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 6 8,675 7,993 6,138 5,327 

Department of Defense 6 27,343 30,551 39,462 40,478 

Department of Energy 6 24,341 24,361 26,800 31,630 

Bonneville Power Administration 6 170 274 258 311 

Department of the Interior 6 18,852 14,787 17,166 14,076 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 6 5,033 4,280 4,664 2,190 

Bureau of Land Management 6 2,447 1,748 1,773 1,317 

Bureau of Mines 6 122 14 29 0 

Bureau of Reclamation 6 8,734 6,647 6,715 5,926 

Minerals Management Service 6 342 125 291 222 

National Park Service 6 1,043 977 1,069 1,304 

Office of the Secretary 6 701 538 1,983 2,206 

Office of Surface Mining 6 129 260 352 264 

Fish and Wildlife Service 6 301 198 290 648 

Department of State 6 8,625 4,740 9,896 10,082 

Department of Transportation 6 133 300 794 1,479 

Environmental Protection Agency 6 1,878 2,726 3,591 3,096 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 6 4,343 4,380 4,877 4,952 

National Science Foundation 6 162 472 535 630 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6 1,154 1,834 1,589 1,797 

Tennessee Valley Authority 6 264 101 269 170 

Miscellaneous Federal agencies 6 12,264 13,030 13,371 12,623 

Miscellaneous services to other accounts 6 5,066 4,820 4,775 4,849 

Total i $116,129 $111,716 132,963 135,139 

Budget Information 101 
U.S. Geological Survey Offices 


Headquarters Officesi Central Regioni Western Region 

National Centeri Denver Federal Center 345 Middlefield Rd. 

12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Box 25046i Menlo Park, CA 94025 

Reston, VA 22092i Denver, CO 80225 

Officei Name Telephone 

Number Address 

Office of the Director 

Director Dallas L. Peck (703) 648-7411 National Center, Stop 101 

Associate Director Doyle G. Frederick (703) 648-7412 National Center, Stop 102 

Special Assistant (Washington Liaison) and Deputy Jane H. Wallace (202) 343-3888 Rm. 2648, Interior Bldg. 

Ethics Counselor Washington, DC 20240 

Assistant Director for Research, Acting Stephen E. Ragone (703) 648-4450 National Center, Stop 104 

Assistant Director for Engineering Geology (Acting) Eugene H. Roseboom, Jr. (703) 648-4423 National Center, Stop 106 

Assistant Director for Administration Jack J. Stassi (703) 648-7200 National Center, Stop 201 

Assistant Director for Programs Peter F. Bermel (703) 648-4430 National Center, Stop 105 

Assistant Director for Intergovernmental Affairs John J. Dragonetti (703) 648-4427 National Center, Stop 109 

Assistant Director for Information Systems James E. Biesecker (703) 648-7108 National Center, Stop 801 

Congressional Liaison Officer Talmadge W. Reed (703) 648-4457 National Center, Stop 112 

Chief, Public Affairs Office Donovan B. Kelly (703) 648-4460 National Center, Stop 119 

Director's Representative—Central Region Harry Tourtelot (303) 236-5438 Denver Federal Center, Stop 406 

Director's Representative—Western Region George Gryc (415) 329-4002 Western Region Headquarters, 

Stop 144 

Special Assistant to the Director for Alaska Philip J. Carpenter (907) 271-4138 4230 University Drive, Suite 201 

Anchorage, AK 99508 

Administrative Division 

Chief Jack J. Stassi (703) 648-7200 National Center, Stop 201 

Administrative Operations Officer Timothy E. Calkins (703) 648-7204 National Center, Stop 203 

Professional Services Specialist William A. Schmidt (703) 648-7221 National Center, Stop 118 

Administrative Program Specialist H.T. Davis (703) 648-7203 National Center, Stop 201 

Office of Personnel, Chief Maxine C. Millard (703) 648-7442 National Center, Stop 215 

Office of Procurement and Contracts, Chief John K. Peterson (703) 648-7373 National Center, Stop 205 

Office of Financial Management, Chief Roy J. Heinbuch (703) 648-7604 National Center, Stop 270 

Office of Facilities and Management Services, Chief William F. Gossman, Jr. (703) 648-7338 National Center, Stop 207 

Office of Systems Management, Chief Phillip L. McKinney (703) 648-7256 National Center, Stop 206 

Administrative Service Center, Chief Phillip L. McKinney (703) 648-7256 National Center, Stop 206 

Central Regional Management Officer George A. Honold (303) 236-5900 Denver Federal Center, Stop 201 

Western Regional Management Officer George F. Hargrove, Jr. (415) 329-4150 Western Region Headquarters, 

Stop 11 

Information Systems Division 

Chief James E. Biesecker (703) 648-7108 National Center, Stop 801 

Associate Chief Doug R. Posson (703) 648-7106 National Center, Stop 801 

Office of Customer Services, Chief Virginia L. Ross (703) 648-7178 National Center, Stop 805 

Office, Computer and Communications Services, Wendy A. Budd (703) 648-7103 National Center, Stop 807 

Chief 

Office of Management Services, Chief Vacant (703) 648-7100 National Center, Stop 802 

Office of Field Services, Chief Fred B. Sower (303) 236-4944 Denver Federal Center 

National Mapping Division 

Chief Lowell E. Starr (703) 648-5748 National Center, Stop 516 

Associate Chief Roy R. Mullen (703) 648-5745 National Center, Stop 516 

Assistant Division Chief for Research Joel L. Morrison (703) 648-4640 National Center, Stop 519 

Assistant Division Chief for Program, Budget and Richard E. Witmer (703) 648-4611 National Center, Stop 514 

Administration 

Assistant Division Chief for Information and Data Gary W. North (703) 648-5780 National Center, Stop 508 

Services 

Assistant Division Chief for Coordination and Require- Gene A. Thorley (703) 648-5743 National Center, Stop 590 

ments 

Assistant Division Chief for Production Management Vacant (703) 648-4146 National Center, Stop 511 

Eastern Mapping Center, Chief K. Eric Anderson (703) 648-6002 National Center, Stop 567 

Mid-Continent Mapping Center, Chief Merle E. Southern (314) 341-0880 1400 Independence Rd., 

Rolla, MO 65401 

102 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Office Name Telephone 

Number Address 

National Mapping Division—Continued 

Rocky Mountain Mapping Center, Chief Randle W. Olsen (303) 236-5825 Denver Federal Center, Stop 510 

Western Mapping Center, Chief John R. Swinnerton (415) 329-4251 Western Region Headquarters 

Earth Resources Observation System Data Center, Allen H. Watkins (605) 594-6511 EROS Data Center, 

Chief Sioux Falls, SD 57198 

Geologic Division 

Chief Geologist Benjamin A. Morgan III (703) 648-6600 National Center, Stop 911 

Associate Chief Geologist William R. Greenwood (703) 648-6601 National Center, Stop 911 

Assistant Chief Geologist for Program David P. Russ (703) 648-6640 National Center, Stop 911 

Administrative Officer Elwood H. Like (703) 648-6611 National Center, Stop 912 

Manpower Officer for Scientific Personnel John D. McGurk (703) 648-6628 National Center, Stop 911 

Policy and Budget Officer Norman E. Gunderson (703) 648-6650 National Center, Stop 910 

Office of Scientific Publications, Chief John M. Aaron (703) 648-6077 National Center, Stop 904 

Office of Regional Geology, Chief Mitchell W. Reynolds (703) 648-6959 National Center, Stop 908 

Office of Earthquakes, Volcanoes, and Engineering, Robert L. Wesson (703) 648-6714 National Center, Stop 905 

Chief 

Office of Energy and Marine Geology, Chief Gary W. Hill (703) 648-6470 National Center, Stop 915 

Office of Mineral Resources, Chief Glenn H. Allcott (703) 648-6100 National Center, Stop 913 

Office of International Geology, Chief A. Thomas Ovenshine (703) 648-6047 National Center, Stop 917 

Assistant Chief Geologist, Eastern Region Jack H. Medlin (703) 648-6660 National Center, Stop 953 

Assistant Chief Geologist, Central Region Harry A. Tourtelot (303) 236-5438 Denver Federal Center, Stop 911 

Assistant Chief Geologist, Western Region William R. Normark (415) 329-5101 Western Region Headquarters, 

Stop 19 

Water Resources Division 

Chief Hydrologist Philip Cohen (703) 648-5215 National Center, Stop 409 

Associate Chief Hydrologist John N. Fischer (703) 648-5216 National Center, Stop 408 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Scientific Information James F. Daniel (703) 648-5699 National Center, Stop 440 

Management 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Operations William B. Mann IV (703) 648-5031 National Center, Stop 441 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Research and External Robert M. Hirsch (703) 648-5041 National Center, Stop 436 

Coordination 

Office of Hydrologic Research, Chief Roger G. Wolff (703) 648-5043 National Center, Stop 436 

Office of External Research, Chief, Acting Robert M. Hirsch (703) 648-6807 National Center, Stop 424 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Program Coordination Verne R. Schneider (703) 648-5229 National Center, Stop 414 

and Technical Support 

Office of Atmospheric Deposition Analysis, Chief Ranard J. Pickering (703) 648-6874 National Center, Stop 416 

Office of Ground Water, Chief Eugene P. Patten, Jr. (703) 648-5001 National Center, Stop 411 

Office of Surface Water, Chief Charles W. Boning (703) 648-5301 National Center, Stop 415 

Office of Water Quality, Chief David A. Rickert (703) 648-6862 National Center, Stop 412 

Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Water Assessment and David W. Moody (703) 648-6856 National Center, Stop 407 

Data Coordination 

Office of Water Data Coordination, Chief Nancy C. Lopez (703) 648-5019 National Center, Stop 417 

Northeastern Region, Chief Stanley P. Sauer (703) 648-5817 National Center, Stop 433 

Southeastern Region, Chief James L. Cook (404) 331-5174 Richard B. Russell Federal Bldg. 

75 Spring St., SW., Suite 772 

Atlanta, GA 30303 

Central Region, Chief James F. Blakey (303) 236-5920 Denver Federal Center, 

Stop 406 

Western Region, Chief T. John Conomos (415) 329-4403 Western Region Headquarters, 

Stop 470 

District Offices 

Alabama D. Briane Adams (205) 752-8104 520 19th Ave. 

Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 

Alaska Philip J. Carpenter (907) 271-4138 4230 University Dr., Suite 201 

Anchorage, AK 99508 

Arizona Robert D. Mac Nish (602) 670-6671 Federal Bldg., FB-44 

300 W. Congress St. 

Tucson, AZ 85701 

Arkansas Ector E. Gann (501) 378-6391 2310 Federal Office Bldg. 

700 W. Capitol Ave. 

Little Rock, AR 72201 

U.S. Geological Survey Offices 103 
Office Name Telephone Address 

Number 

California John M. Klein (916) 978-4633 Rm. W-2234 Federal Bldg. 

2800 Cottage Way 

Sacramento, CA 95825 

Colorado Charles A. Pascale (303) 236-4882 Box 25046, Stop 415 

Denver Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225 

Connecticut (See Massachusetts) 

Delaware (See Maryland) 

District of Columbia (See Maryland) 

Florida Irwin H. Kantrowitz (904) 681-7620 227 N. Bronough St. 

Suite 3015 

Tallahassee, FL 32301 

Georgia Jeffrey T. Armbruster (404) 986-6860 6481—B Peachtree Industrial Blvd. 

Doraville, GA 30360 

Hawaii William Meyer (808) 541-2653 677 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 415 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

Idaho Jerry L. Hughes (208) 334-1750 230 Collins Rd. 

Boise, ID 83702 

Illinois Richard P. Novitzki (217) 398-5353 Champaign County Bank Plaza 

102 E. Main St., 4th Floor 

Urbana, IL 61801 

Indiana Dennis K. Stewart (317) 290-3333 5957 Lakeside Blvd. 

Indianapolis, IN 46278 

Iowa Richard A. Engberg (319) 337-4191 P.O. Box 1230 

Rm. 269 Federal Bldg. 

400 S. Clinton St. 

Iowa City, IA 52244 

Kansas Thomas L. Huntzinger (913) 842-9909 4821 Quail Crest Pl., 

Lawrence, KS 66049 

Kentucky Alfred L. Knight (502) 582-5241 2301 Bradley Ave. 

Louisville, KY 40217 

Louisiana Darwin D. Knochenmus (504) 389-0281 P.O. Box 66492 

6554 Florida Blvd. 

Baton Rouge, LA 70896 

Maine (See Massachusetts) 

Maryland Herbert J. Freiberger (301) 828-1535 208 Carroll Bldg. 

8600 La Salle Rd. 

Towson, MD 21204 

Massachusetts Ivan C. James II (617) 565-6860 10 Causeway St., Rm. 926 

Boston, MA 02222 

Michigan T. Ray Cummings (517) 377-1608 6520 Mercantile Way, Suite 5 

Lansing, MI 48911 

Minnesota William J. Herb (612) 229-2600 702 Post Office Bldg. 

180 E. Kellogg Blvd. 

St. Paul, MN 55101 

Mississippi Michael W. Gaydos (601) 965-4600 Suite 710 Federal Bldg. 

100 W. Capitol St. 

Jackson, MS 39269 

Missouri Daniel P. Bauer (314) 341-0824 1400 Independence Rd., Mail Stop 200 

Rolla, MO 65401 

Montana Joe A. Moreland (406) 449-5263 Rm. 428 Federal Bldg. 

301 S. Park Ave. 

Helena, MT 59626 

Nebraska Michael V. Shulters (402) 437-5082 Rm. 406 Federal Bldg. 

100 Centennial Mall, North 

Lincoln, NE 68508 

Nevada William J. Carswell, Jr. (702) 882-1388 Rm. 224 Federal Bldg. 

705 N. Plaza St. 

Carson City, NV 89701 

New Hampshire (See Massachusetts) 

New Jersey Donald E. Vaupel (609) 771-3900 Suite 206, Mountain View Office Park 

810 Bear Tavern Rd. 

West Trenton, NJ 08628 

104 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Office Name Telephone 

Number Address 

New Mexico Russell K. Livingston (505) 262-6630 Pinetree Office Park, Suite 200 

4501 Indian School Rd., NE. 

Albuquerque, NM 87110 

New York L. Grady Moore (518) 472-3107 P.O. Box 1669 

343 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse 

Albany, NY 12201 

North Carolina James F. Turner (919) 856-4510 P.O. Box 2857, Rm. 436 

Century Postal Station 

300 Fayetteville Street Mall 

Raleigh, NC 27602 

North Dakota William F. Horak (701) 250-4601 821 E. Interstate Ave. 

Bismarck, ND 58501 

Ohio Steven M. Hindall (614)469-5553 975 W. Third Ave. 

Columbus, OH 43212 

Oklahoma Kathy D. Peter (405) 231-4256 Rm. 621,215 Dean A. McGee Ave. 

Oklahoma City, OK 73102 

Oregon (See Washington) 

Pennsylvania David E. Click (717) 782-4514 P.O. Box 1107, 4th Floor 

Federal Bldg., 228 Walnut St. 

Harrisburg, PA 17108 

Puerto Rico Allen L. Zack (809) 783-4660 GPO Box 4424 

Bldg. 652 GSA Center 

Hwy 28, Km. 7.2, Pueblo Viejo 

San Juan, PR 00936 

Rhode Island (See Massachusetts) 

South Carolina Rodney N. Cherry (803) 765-5966 Suite 677A, 1835 Assembly St. 

Columbia, SC 29201 

South Dakota Richard E. Fidler (605) 353-7176 Rm. 317 Federal Bldg. 

200 4th St., SW. 

Huron, SD 57350 

Tennessee Ferdinand Quinones- (615)736-5424 A-413 Federal Bldg. and 

Marquez U.S. Courthouse 

Nashville, TN 37203 

Texas Charles R. Burchett (512) 832-5791 8011 Cameron Rd., Bldg. 1 

Austin, TX 78753 

Utah Harvey L. Case (801) 524-5663 Rm. 1016 Administration Bldg. 

1745 W. 1700 South 

Salt Lake City, UT 84104 

Vermont (See Massachusetts) 

Virginia (See Maryland) 

Washington Garald G. Parker, Jr. (206) 593-6510 1201 Pacific Ave., Suite 600 

Tacoma, WA 98402 

West Virginia David H. Appel (304) 347-5130 603 Morris St. 

Charleston, WV 25301 

Wisconsin Vernon W. Norman (608) 274-3535 6417 Normandy Ln. 

Madison, WI 53719 

Wyoming James E. Kircher (307) 772-2153 2617 E. Lincolnway 

Suite B 

Cheyenne, WY 82001 

U.S. Geological Survey Offices 105 
Cooperators and 

Other Financial 

Contributors 

Cooperators listed are those with whom the 

U.S. Geological Survey had a written agreement 

cosigned by USGS officials and officials of the cooperating agency for financial cooperation in fiscal 

year 1989. Parent agencies are listed separately 

from their subdivisions whenever there are separate 

cooperative agreements for different projects with a 

parent agency and with a subdivision of it. Agencies 

are listed in alphabetical order under the State or 

territory where they have cooperative agreements 

with the USGS. Agencies with whom the USGS has 

research contracts and to whom it supplied research 

funds are not listed. 

Cooperating office of the U.S. Geological Survey 

g—Geologic Division 

n—National Mapping Division 

w —Water Resources Division 

Alabama 

Alabama Department of— 

Environmental Management (w), 

Highways (w); 

Anniston, City of (w); 


Birmingham, City of, Water Works Board (w); 


Butler County Water Authority (w); 


Coffee County Commission (w); 


Dauphin Island Water Authority (w); 


Geological Survey of Alabama (n,w); 


Greenville, City of, Water Works and Sewer 


Board (w); 

Harvest-Monrovia Water and Fire Protection 

Authority (w); 

Huntsville, City of, Public Works (w); 

Jefferson County Commission (w); 

Montgomery, City of, Water Works and Sanitary 

Board (w); 

Ragland, City of (w); 

State Climatologist (w); 

Sumter, County of (w); 

Tuscaloosa, City of (w); 

University of Alabama—Tuscaloosa (w) 

Alaska 

Alaska Department of— 

Fish and Game (w), 

Military and Veterans Affairs, Division of 

Emergency Services (w), 

Natural Resources, Division of— 

Geological and Geophysical Surveys (w), 

Technical Services (w), 

Transportation and Public Facilities (w); 

Alaska Energy Authority (w); 

Anchorage, Municipality of (w); 

Fairbanks North Star Borough (w); 

Juneau, City and Borough of (w); 

Kenai Peninsula Borough (w); 

Matanuska Susitna Borough (w); 

Sitka, City and Borough of (w); 

University of Alaska, Fairbanks (w) 

American Samoa 

American Samoa, Government of (n,w) 

Arizona 

Arizona Department of— 

Environmental Quality (w), 

Health Services (w), 

Transportation (w), 

Water Resources (w); 

Arizona Municipal Water Users Association (w); 


Arizona State Land Department (w); 


Arizona State University (g); 


Central Arizona Water Conservation District (w); 


Colorado Department of Highways (w); 


Franklin Irrigation District (w); 


Gila Valley Irrigation District (w); 


Gila Water Commissioner, Office of (w); 


Maricopa County— 


Flood Control District (w), 

Municipal Water Conservation District No. 1 (w); 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California (w); 

Northern Arizona University (g); 

Pima County Department of Transportation (w); 

Safford, City of, Water, Gas, and Sewer 

Department (w); 

Salt River Valley Water Users Association (w); 

San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District (w); 

Scottsdale, City of, Water Resources Department (w); 

Show Low Irrigation Company (w); 

The Navajo Tribal Council, Division of Water 

Resources (w); 

Tohono Oldham Nation (w); 

Tucson, City of (w); 

University of Arizona (w); 

Yuma, City of (w) 

Arkansas 

Arkansas Archaeological Survey (n); 

Arkansas Department of— 

Health (w) 

Pollution Control and Ecology (w); 

Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, Fisheries 

Division (w); 

Arkansas Geological Commission (n,w); 

Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation 

Commission (w); 

Arkansas State Highway and Transportation 

Department (w); 

Arkansas-Oklahoma: Arkansas River Compact 

Commission (w); 

Independence, County of (w); 

Little Rock Municipal Water Works (w) 

California 

Alameda County— 

Flood Control and Water Conservation District 

(Hayward) (w), 

Water District (w); 

Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency (w); 

California Department of— 

Boating and Waterways (w), 


Conservation (g), 


Health Services (w), 


Parks and Recreation (w), 


Transportation (w), 


Water Resources— 


Central District (Sacramento) (w), 

Northern District (Red Bluff) (w), 

San Joaquin District (Fresno) (w); 

California Office of Emergency Services (n); 


California State University-Bakersfield (g); 


California Water Control Board, Colorado 


Region (w); 


Carpinteria County Water District (w); 


Casitas Municipal Water District (w); 


Coachella Valley Water District (w); 


Contra Costa County— 

Department of Health Services (w), 

Flood Control and Water Conservation 

District (w); 

Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency (w); 

Desert Water Agency (w); 

East Bay Municipal Utility District (w); 

East Valley Water District (w); 

Energy Technology Center, Canoga Park (g); 

Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency (w); 

Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (w); 

Goleta Water District (w); 

Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (w); 

Imperial County Department of Public Works (w); 

Imperial Irrigation District (w); 

Indian Wells Valley Water District (w); 

Inyo County Water Department (w); 

Lompoc, City of (w); 

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (w); 

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (w); 

Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District (g); 

Madera Irrigation District (w); 

Marin County Department of Public Works (w); 

Marin Municipal Water District (w); 

Menlo Park, City of (g); 

Mendocino County Water Agency (w); 

Merced, City of (w); 

Merced Irrigation District (w); 

Modesto Irrigation District (w); 

Mojave Water Agency (w); 

Mono, County of (w); 

Montecito Water District (w); 

Monterey County Flood Control and Water 

Conservation District (w); 

Monterey Peninsula Water Municipal District (w); 

Oakdale-South San Joaquin Irrigation District (w); 

Orange County— 

Environmental Management Agency (w), 

Water District (w); 

Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District (w); 

Pechanga Indian Reservation (w); 

Poway, City of (w); 

Rancho California Water District (w); 

Regional Water Quality-Lahontan Region (w); 

Riverside County Flood Control and Water 

Conservation District (w); 

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (w); 

Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District, 

Department of Public Works (w); 

San Benito County Water Conservation and Flood 

Control District (w); 

San Bernardino County Flood Control District (w); 

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (w); 

San Diego, City of, Water Utility (w); 

San Diego, County of, Department of— 

Planning and Land Use (w), 

Public Works (w); 

San Francisco, City and County of, Public Utilities 

Commission (w); 

San Francisco Water Department (w); 

San Luis Obispo County Government Center (w); 

San Mateo County Department of Public Works (w); 

Santa Barbara, City of, Department of Public 

Works (w); 

Santa Barbara County— 

Flood Control and Water Conservation 

District (w), 

Water Agency (w); 

Santa Clara Valley Water District (w); 

Santa Cruz, City of, Water Department-City Hall (w); 

Santa Cruz County Planning Department (w); 

Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District (w); 

Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District (w); 

Scotts Valley Water District (w); 

Sonoma County— 

Planning Department (w), 


Water Agency (w); 


106 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Stanford University (g); 


Tahoe Regional Planning (w); 


Tulare County Flood Control District (w); 


Turlock Irrigation District (w); 


United Water Conservation District (w); 


University of California, Berkeley (g); 


Ventura County Public Works Agency (w); 


Water Resources Control Board (w); 


Westlands Water District (w); 


Woodbridge Irrigation District (w); 


Yolo County Flood Control and Water Conservation 


District (w); 

Yuba County Water Agency (w) 

Colorado 

Arkansas River Compact Administration (w); 


Arvada, City of (w); 


Aspen, City of (w); 


Aurora, City of (w); 


Bent, County of (w); 


Boulder, City of (w); 


Boulder, County of, Department of Public Works (w); 


Breckenridge, Town of (w); 


Castle Pines Metropolitan District (w); 


Castle Pines North Metropolitan District (w); 


Castle Rock, Town of (w); 


Centennial Water and Sanitation (w); 


Cherokee Water and Sanitation District (w); 


Colorado Department of Health (w); 


Colorado Division of— 


Mined Land Reclamation (w), 


Water Resources, Office of the State 


Engineer (w); 

Colorado River Water Conservation District (w); 

Colorado School of Mines (g); 

Colorado Springs, City of— 

Department of Public Utilities (w), 

Office of the City Manager (w); 

Delta County Board of County Commissioners (w); 

Denver, City and County, Board of Water 

Commissioners (w); 

Denver Regional Council of Governments (w); 

Eagle County Board of Commissioners (w); 

Englewood, City of, Wastewater Treatment Plant (w); 

Evergreen Metropolitan District (w); 

Fort Collins, City of (w); 

Fountain Valley Authority (w); 

Garfield, County of (w); 

Glendale, City of (w); 

Glenwood Springs, City of (w); 

Golden, City of (w); 

Grand County Board of Commissioners (w); 

Jefferson County Board of County 

Commissioners (w); 

Longmont, City of (w); 

Loveland, City of (w); 

Lower Fountain Water-Quality Management 

Association (w); 

Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District 

No. 1 (w); 

Moffat, County of (w); 

Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (w); 

Northglenn, City of (w); 

Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (w); 

Pitkin County Board of Commissioners (w); 

Pueblo Board of Water Works (w); 

Pueblo County Commissioners (w); 

Pueblo County Department of Public Safety and 

Operations (w); 

Pueblo West Metropolitan bistrict (w); 

Rio Blanco, County of (w); 

Rio Grande Water Conservation District (w); 

St. Charles Mesa Water Association (w); 

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy 

District (w); 

Southern Ute Indian Tribe (g,w); 

Southwestern Colorado Water Conservancy 

District (w); 

Steamboat Springs, City of (w); 


Thornton, City of (w); 


Trinchera Conservancy District (w); 


Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association (w); 


Upper Arkansas Area Council of Governments (w); 


Upper Arkansas River Water Conservancy 


District (w); 

Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation 

Districts (w); 

Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District (w); 

Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (w); 

Ute Mountain Indian Tribe (w); 

Vail Valley Conservation Water Authority (w); 

Westminster, City of (w); 

Yellow Jacket Water Conservancy District (w) 

Connecticut 

Connecticut Department of Environmental 

Protection (g,n,w); 

Fairfield, Town of, Conservation Commission (w); 

New Britain, City of, Board of Water 

Commissioners (w); 

South Central Connecticut Regional Water 

Authority (w); 

Torrington, City of (w); 

Yale University (g) 

Delaware 

Delaware Department of Natural Resources and 

Environmental Control (w); 

Geological Survey (n,w) 

District of Columbia 

Department of Public Works (w); 

Metropolitan Washington Council of 

Governments (w) 

Florida 

Boca Raton, City of (w); 


Bradenton, City of (w); 


Brevard County, Board of County 


Commissioners (w); 

Broward County— 

Environmental Quality Control Board (w), 

Water Resources Management Division (w); 

Cape Coral, City of (w); 


Cocoa, City of (w); 


Cottondale, City of (w); 


Daytona Beach, City of (w); 


Edgewater, City of (w); 


Englewood Water District (w); 


Escambia County Board of County 


Commissioners (w); 

Florida Department of— 

Environmental Regulation, Bureau of 

Laboratories and Special Programs (w), 

Natural Resources (w)— 

Division of— 

Marine Resources (w), 

Recreation and Parks (Hobe 

Sound) (w), 

Recreation and Parks (Tallahassee) (w), 

Survey and Mapping (n), 

Transportation (n,w); 

Florida Institute of Phosphate Research (w); 

Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (w); 

Fort Lauderdale, City of (w); 

Fort Walton Beach, City of (w); 

Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (w); 

Hallandale, City of (w); 

Highland Beach, Town of (w); 

Hillsborough, County of (w); 

Hollywood, City of (w); 

Jacksonville, City of— 

Department of Health and Environmental 

Services (w), 


Department of Planning (w), 


Water Services Division (w); 


Jacksonville Electric Authority, Research and 

Environmental Affairs (w); 

Jacksonville Beach, City of (w); 

Lake County Board of County Commissioners (w); 

Lake County Water Authority (w); 

Lake Mary, City of (w); 

Lee County Board of County Commissioners (w); 

Leon County— 

Courthouse (w), 

Department of Public Works (w); 

Madison, City of (w); 

Manatee County— 

Board of County Commissioners (w), 

Public Health Unit (w); 

Marion County Board of Commissioners (w); 

Metropolitan Dade County Department of 

Environment Resources Management (w); 

Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Authority (w); 

Northwest Florida Water Management District (w); 

Ocala, City of (w); 

Palm Beach County Board of County 

Commissioners (w); 

Perry, City of (w); 

Pinellas, County of (w); 

Polk County Board of County Commissioners (w); 

Pompano Beach, City of, Water and Sewer 

Department (w); 

Port Orange, City of (w); 

Quincy, City of (w); 

Reedy Creek Improvement District (w); 

Sanford, City of (w); 

Sarasota, City of (w); 

Sarasota, County of (w); 

South Florida Water Management District (w); 

South Indian River Water Control District (w); 

Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (w); 

Southwest Florida Water Management District (w); 

St. Johns, County of (w); 

St. Johns River Water Management District (w); 

St. Petersburg, City of (w); 

Stuart, City of (w); 

Suwannee River Authority (Live Oak) (w); 

Suwannee River Authority (Trenton) (w); 

Tallahassee, City of— 

Electric Department (w), 


Streets and Drainage (w), 


Underground Utilities (w), 


Water Quality Laboratory (w); 


Tampa, City of (w); 


Tampa Port Authority (w); 


University of Florida, Center for Wetlands (w); 


Volusia, County of (w); 


Walton, County of (w); 


West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority (w); 


Winter Park, City of (w) 


Georgia 

Albany, City of (w); 


Albany Water, Gas, and Light Commission (w); 


Bibb County Board of County Commissioners (w); 


Blairsville, City of (w); 


Brunswick, City of (w); 


California Air Resources Board (w); 


Clayton County Water Authority (w); 


Cobb, County of (w); 


Covington, City of (w); 


Georgia Department of— 


Natural Resources— 

Environmental Protection Division— 

Water Management Branch (w), 

Water Quality Support Program (w), 

Geologic Survey (n,w), 


Transportation (w); 


Cooperators and Other Financial Contributors 107 
Georgia State University, Department of 

Geology (g,w); 

Gwinnett, County of (w); 

Helena, City of (w); 

Macon-Bibb County Water and Sewage 

Authority (w); 

Moultrie, City of (w); 

Summerville, City of (w); 

Thomaston, City of (w); 

Thomasville, City of (w); 

Valdosta, City of (w); 

Walton County Board of Commissioners (w) 

Guam 

Guam, Government of (w) 

Hawaii 

Hawaii, County of, Department of Water Supply (w); 

Hawaii Department of— 

Land and Natural Resources, Division of Water 

and Land Development (w), 

Transportation (w); 

Honolulu Board of Water Supply (w); 

Honolulu, City and County of, Department of Public 

Works (g,w); 

Kauai, County of, Department of Water Supply (w); 

Maui, County of, Department of Water Supply (w) 

Idaho 

Boise, City of (w); 


College of Southern Idaho (w); 


EG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls (g); 


Idaho Department of— 


Fish and Game (w), 


Health and Welfare (w), 


Lands (n), 


Transportation (n), 


Water Resources (w); 


Shoshone, County of (w); 


Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, (w); 


Southwest Irrigation District (w); 


Sun Valley Water and Sewer District (w); 


Teton County Board of Commissioners (w); 


Water District No. 01 (Idaho Falls) (w); 


Water District No. 31 (Dubois) (w); 


Water District No. 32D (Dubois) (w) 


Illinois 

Bloomington and Normal Sanitary District (w); 


Cook County Forest Preserve District (w); 


Decatur, City of (w); 


DeKalb, City of, Public Works Department (w); 


DuPage County Forest Preserve, Planning and 


Development Section (w); 

DuPage County Department of Environmental 

Concerns (w); 

Illinois Department of— 

Energy and Natural Resources— 

State Water Survey Division, Special Studies (w), 

Geological Survey Division (n), 

Transportation— 


Division of Highways (n), 


Division of Water Resources (n,w); 


Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Division of 

Water Pollution Control (w); 

Lake County Department of Management 

Services (n); 

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater 

Chicago (w); 

Springfield, City of (w) 

Indiana 

Carmel, Town of (w); 


Elkhart, City of, Water Works (w); 


Indiana Department of— 

Environmental Management (w), 

Highways (w), 

Natural Resources (n)— 

Division of Water (w), 

Division of Parks (w); 

Indianapolis, City of, Department of Public 

Works (w) 

Iowa 

Carroll County Health Department (w); 


Cedar Rapids, City of (w); 


Charles City, City of (w); 


Des Moines, City of (w), Water Works (w); 


Fort Dodge, City of (w); 


Guthrie County Health Department (w); 


Iowa Department of— 


Transportation, Highway Division (w), 


Natural Resources, Geological Survey 


Bureau (n,w); 

Iowa State University (w); 

Marshalltown, City of (w); 

University of Iowa— 

Institute of Hydraulic Research (w), 


Hygienic Laboratory (w), 


Physical Plant (w), 


Sewage Disposal Plant (w); 


Sioux City, City of (w); 

Union Electric Company (w); 

Waterloo, City of (w) 

Kansas 

Arkansas River Compact Administration (w); 


Clay, County of (w); 


Emporia, City of, Department of Public Works (w); 


Equus Beds Groundwater Management District 


No. 2 (w); 

Geary, County of (w); 

Hays, City of (w); 

Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska (w); 

Kansas Department of— 

Health and Environment (w), 

Transportation (w); 

Kansas Geological Survey (n,w); 

Kansas State Board of Agriculture, Division of Water 

Resources (w); 

Kansas State University (w); 

Kansas University— 

Center for Research, Inc. (w), 

Department of Geology (w); 

Kansas Water Office (w); 

Kickapoo Tribe of Kansas (w); 

Linn, County of (w); 

Prairie Band of Potawatomi (w); 

Sac and Fox Tribe of Missouri (w); 

Sedgwick, County of (w); 

Sumner, County of (w); 

Wichita, City of (w) 

Kentucky 

Elizabethtown, City of (w); 


Hardin County Water District (w); 


Jefferson, County of, Department of Public Works 


and Transportation (w); 

Kentucky Department of Natural Resources and 

Environmental Protection Cabinet (w); 

Louisville Metropolitan Sewer District (w); 

University of Kentucky, Kentucky Geological 

Survey- (n,w); 

University of Louisville (w) 

Louisiana 

Capital-Area Groundwater Conservation 

Commission (w); 

East Baton Rouge Parish (w); 

Jefferson Parish Department of Public Utilities (w); 

Louisiana Department of— 

Environmental Quality (w), 

Transportation and Development— 

Materials Lab (w), 

Office of Public Works (n,w), 

Wildlife and Fisheries (w); 

Louisiana Geological Survey, Louisiana State 

University (w); 

Sabine River Compact Administration (w); 

West Monroe, City of (w) 

Maine 

Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments (w); 


Cobbossee Watershed District (w); 


Greater Portland Council of Governments (w); 


Maine Department of— 


Conservation, Geological Survey (n,w), 


Environmental Protection (w), 


Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (w), 


Transportation (n,w); 


North Maine Regional Planning Commission (w); 

Penobscot Valley Council of Governments (w); 

University of Maine (w) 

Maryland 

Anne Arundel County Planning and Zoning 

Office (w); 

Baltimore County— 

Department of Permits and Licenses (w), 

Department of Public Works (w), 

Office of Planning and Zoning (w); 

Calvert County Courthouse, Planning and 

Zoning (w); 

Caroline County Courthouse (w); 

Carroll County Commission (w); 

Howard County Department of Public Works (w); 

Johns Hopkins University (g); 

Maryland Department of the Environment (w); 

Maryland Geological Survey (n,w); 

Maryland State Highway Administration (w); 

Maryland Water Resources Administration (w); 

Montgomery County— 

Department of Environmental Protection, 

Division of Environmental Planning and 

Monitoring (w), 

Storm Water Management (w); 

Poolesville, Town of (w); 

St. Marys County Commissioners (w); 

Upper Potomac River Commission, Waste Treatment 

Facilities (w); 

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (w) 

Massachusetts 

Barnstable County Commissioners (w); 

Massachusetts Department of— 

Environmental Management, Division of Water 

Resources (w), 

Environmental Pollution— 

Division of Water Pollution Control (w), 

Division of Water Supply (w), 

Fisheries, Wildlife, and Environmental Law 

Enforcement, Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife (w), 

Hazardous Waste Facility, Site Safety 


Council (w), 


Public Works (w); 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (g); 

Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (g,w); 

Metropolitan District Commission — 

Parks, Engineering and Construction 

Division (w), 

Watershed Management Division (w); 

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control 

Commission (w); 

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (g) 

108 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Michigan 

Ann Arbor, City of, Wastewater Treatment Plant (w); 


Battle Creek, City of (w); 


Cadillac, City of, Wastewater Treatment Plant (w); 


Clare, City of (w); 


Coldwater, City of, Board of Public Utilities (w); 


Elsie, Village of, Department of Public Works (w); 


Flint, City of, Department of Public Works and 


Utilities (w); 

Genesee County Drain Commission, Division of 

Water and Waste Services (w); 

Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority (w); 

Huron, County of (w); 

Imlay, City of (w); 

Kalamazoo, City of, Department of Public 

Utilities (w); 

Lansing, City of, Board of Water and Light, Water 

and Stream Division (w); 

Macomb, County of (w); 

Mason, City of (w); 

Michigan Department of— 

Natural Resources (w), 

Transportation (w); 

Negaunee, City of, Water and Wastewater Treatment 

Plant (w); 

Norway, City of (w); 

Oakland County Drainage Commission (w); 

Otsego County Road Commission (w); 

Portage, City of (w); 

Wayne, County of, Division of Environmental 

Health (w); 

Ypsilanti, City of (w) 

Minnesota 

Beltrami County SWCD (w); 


Elm Creek Conservation Commission (w); 


Fond Du Lac Reservation Business Committee (w); 


Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee, 


Division of Resources Management (w); 

Lower Red River Watershed Management 

District (w); 

Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (w); 

Mille Lacs Reservation Business Committee (w); 

Minneapolis Water Works (w); 

Minnesota Department of— 

Natural Resources, Division of Waters (w), 

Transportation (w); 

Red Lake Tribal Reservation Business 

Committee (w); 

Rochester Public Utilities (w); 

St. Paul, City of (w), Water Utility (w); 

University of Minnesota, Department of Soil 

Science (w)— 


Landscape Architecture Program (n); 


Remote Sensing Laboratory (n); 


White Earth Reservation Business Commission (w) 

Mississippi 

Harrison, County of— 

Board of Supervisors (w), 

Development Commission (w); 

Jackson, City of (w); 

Jackson, County of— 

Board of Supervisors (w), 

Port Authority (w); 

Mississippi Department of— 

Environmental Quality— 

Bureau of Geology (w), 

Bureau of Land and Water Resources (w), 

Bureau of Pollution Control (w), 

Highways (w); 

Pat Harrison Waterway District (w); 

Pearl River Basin Development District (w); 

Pearl River Valley Water Supply District (w) 

Missouri 

Branson, City of (w); 


Cape Girardeau, City of (w); 


Little River Drainage District (w); 


Missouri Department of— 


Conservation (w), 


Health (w), 


Natural Resources— 


Division of Environmental Quality (w), 

Division of Geology and Land 

Survey (n,w), 

Land Reclamation Commission (w); 

Missouri Highway and Transportation 

Commission (n,w); 

Springfield, City of, City Utilities, Engineering 

Department (w); 

Watershed Commission of the Ozarks (w); 

University of Missouri-Columbia, Department of 

Geology (w) 

Montana 

Fort Belknap Indian Community (w); 


Fort Peck Tribes (w); 


Helena, City of (w); 


Lower Musselshell Conservation District (w); 


Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (w); 


Montana Department of— 


Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (w), 


Health and Environmental Sciences (w), 


Highways (w), 


Natural Resources and Conservation (w), 


State Lands (w); 


Salish and Kootenai Tribes of Flathead 

Reservation (w); 

Wyoming State Engineer (w) 

Nebraska 

Central Platte Natural Resources District (w); 

Kansas-Nebraska Big Blue River Compact 

Administration (w); 

Lincoln, City of (w); 

Little Blue Natural Resources District (w); 

Lower Loup Natural Resources District (w); 

Lower Platte South Natural Resources District (w); 

Lower Republican Natural Resources District (w); 

Middle Niobrara Natural Resources District (w); 

Middle Republican Natural Resources District (w); 

Nebraska Department of— 

Environmental Control (w), 

Water Resources (w); 

Nebraska Natural Resources Commission (w); 

Nemaha Natural Resources District (w); 

North Platte Natural Resources District (w); 

South Platte Natural Resources District (w); 

Twin Platte Natural Resources District (w); 

University of Nebraska, Conservation and Survey 

Division (w); 

Upper Elkhorn Natural Resources District (w); 

Upper Loup Natural Resources District (w); 

Upper Niobrara White Natural Resources 

District (w); 

Upper Republican Natural Resources District (w) 

Nevada 

Carson City Department of Public Works (w); 


Carson Water Subconservancy District (w); 


Clark County Regional Flood Control District (w); 


Clark County Sanitation District (w); 


Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada (g); 


Elko, County of (w); 


Las Vegas, City of (w); 


Las Vegas Valley Water District (g); 


Legislative Counsel Bureau (w); 


Mackay School of Mines (w); 


Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology (g,n,w); 


Nevada Department of— 

Conservation and Natural Resources— 

Division of Environmental Protection (w), 

Division of Water Resources (w), 

Transportation (w); 

Regional Water Planning and Advisory Board of 

Washoe County (w); 

South Lake Tahoe Public Utility District (w); 

Summit Lake Paiute Tribe (w); 

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (w) 

New Hampshire 

New Hampshire Department of Environmental 

Services (g,w); 

Governor's Energy Office (g) 

New Jersey 

Bergen County Department of Public Works (w); 


Brick Township Municipal Utilities Authority (w); 


Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources (w); 


Cape May, City of (w); 


Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (w); 


Gloucester County Planning Commission (w); 


Lower, Township of, Municipal Utilities 


Authority (w); 

Morris City Municipal Utilities Authority (w); 

New Brunswick, City of (w); 

New Jersey Department of— 

Agriculture (w), 


Environmental Protection, Division of Water 


Resources (w); 

North Jersey District Water Supply Commission (w); 

Passaic Valley Water Commission (w); 

Somerset County Board of Chosen Freeholders (w); 

West Windsor, Township of (w); 

Wildwood, City of (w) 

New Mexico 

Alamogordo, City of (w); 


Alamo Navajo Band (w); 


Albuquerque, City of (w); 


Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control 


Authority (w); 

Canadian River Municipal Water Authority (w); 

Costilla Creek Compact Commission (w); 

Council of Bernalillo (w); 

El Paso Water Utility (w); 

Gallup, City of (w); 

Highlands University (w); 

Jemez River Indian Water Authority (w); 

Las Cruces, City of (w); 

Los Alamos, County of (w); 

Middle Rio Greater Conservation District (w); 

Navajo Indian Nation (w); 

New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral 

Resources, Energy and Mineral Department (w); 

New Mexico Environmental Improvement 

Division (w); 

New Mexico Department of Highways (w); 

New Mexico Mining and Minerals (w); 

New Mexico State University Agricultural 

Experiment Station (w); 

Office of the State Engineer (w); 

Pecos River Commission (w); 

Pueblo of Acoma (w); 

Pueblo of Laguna (w); 

Pueblo of Zuni (w); 

Raton, City of (w); 

Rio Grande Compact Commission (w); 

Rio San Jose Flood Control District (w); 

Ruidoso, Village of (w); 

San Juan, County of (w); 

Santa Fe Metropolitan Water Board (w); 

Santa Rosa, City of (w); 

Vermejo Conservancy District (w) 

Cooperators and Other Financial Contributors 109 
New York 

Amherst, Town of, Engineering Department (w); 


Auburn, City of (w); 


Brookhaven, Town of (w); 


Chautauqua, County of, Department of Planning and 


Development (w); 

Cheektowaga, Town of (w); 

Chenango, County of (w); 

Cornell University— 

Department of Natural Resources (w), 

Department of Utilities (w); 

Cortland County Planning Department (w); 

Dutchess, County of, Environmental 

Management (w); 

Hamilton College (g); 

Hudson-Black River Regulating District (w); 

Kiryas Joel, Village of (w); 

Long Island Regional Planning Board (w); 

Monroe, County of, Department of Health (w); 

Nassau, County of— 

Department of Health (w), 

Department of Public Works (w); 

New York City Department of Environmental 

Protection, Air and Water Resources-Energy (w); 

New York State Department of— 

Environmental Conservation— 


Division of Fish and Wildlife (w), 


Division of Water (w), 


Transportation, Bridge and Construction 

Bureau (w); 

New York State Geological Survey (g); 

New York State Power Authority (w); 

Nyack, Village of, Board of Water 

Commissioners (w); 

Onondaga, County of— 

Department of Drainage (w), 

Water Authority (w); 

Orange County Water Authority (w); 


Saratoga, County of, Environmental Management 


Council (w); 

Seneca County Soil Conservation District (w); 

State University of New York—Albany (g); 

Suffolk, County of— 

Department of Health Services (w), 

Water Authority (w); 

Temporary State Commission (w); 

Tompkins, County of, Department of Planning (w); 

Ulster, County of, County Legislators (w); 

Westchester, County of— 

Department of Planning (w), 


Department of Public Works (w) 


North Carolina 

Asheville, City of (w); 


Bethel, Town of (w); 


Brevard, City of (w); 


Chapel Hill, Town of (w); 


Charlotte, City of (w); 


Durham, City of, Department of Water 


Resources (w); 

Forsyth, County of (w); 

Greensboro, City of (w); 

Guilford County S.W.C.D. (w); 

High Point, City of (w); 

Lexington, City of (w); 

Mecklenburg, County of (w); 

North Carolina State Department of— 

Human Resources (w), 


Natural Resources and Community 


Development (n,w), 


Transportation, Division of Highways (w); 


Orange Water and Sewer Authority (w); 


Raleigh, City of (w); 


Rocky Mount, City of (w); 


Triangle Area Water Supply Monitoring, Project 


Steering Committee (w) 

North Dakota 

Dickinson, City of (w); 


Lower Heart River Water Resources District (w); 


Minot, City of, Public Works Department (w); 


North Dakota Department of— 


Game and Fish (w), 


Highways (w), 


Parks and Recreation (w); 


North Dakota Geological Survey (w); 


North Dakota State University (w); 


Oliver County Board of Commissioners (w); 


Public Service Commission (w); 


State Water Commission (w); 


Three Affiliated Tribes Natural Resources 


Department (w) 

Ohio 

Akron, City of (w); 


Canton, City of, Water Department (w); 


Columbus, City of (w); 


Eastgate Development and Transportation 


Agency (w); 

Fremont, City of (w); 

Lima, City of (w); 

Lucas, County of (w); 

Miami Conservancy District (w); 

Ohio Department of— 

Natural Resources (w), 

Transportation (n,w); 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (w); 

Ohio Water Development Authority (w); 

Ross, County of (w); 

Sandusky, County of, Department of Health (w); 

Seneca Soil and Water District (w); 

Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of 

Governments (w); 

University of Cincinnati, Department of Geology (w); 

University of Toledo (w); 

Wood, County of (w) 

Oklahoma 

Ada, City of (w); 


Altus, City of (w); 


Central Oklahoma Master Conservancy 


District (w); 

Fort Cobb Reservoir Master Conservancy District (w); 

Lawton, City of (w); 

Lugert-Altus Irrigation District (w); 

Mountain Park Master Conservancy District (w); 

Norman, City of, Public Works (w); 

Oklahoma City, City of, Department of Water 

Resources (w); 

Oklahoma Department of Transportation (n); 

Oklahoma Geological Survey, University of 

Oklahoma (g,w); 

Oklahoma State Health Department (w); 

Oklahoma Water Resources Board (w); 

Tulsa, City of— 

Water and Sewer Department (w), 

Department of Storm Water Management (w) 

Oregon 

Clark County Intergovernmental Resources 

Center (w); 

Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Indian 

Reservation (w); 

Coos Bay-North Bend Water Board (w); 

Eugene, City of, Water and Electric Board (w); 

Jackson, County of (w); 

Klamath Falls, City of (w); 

Klamath Tribe (w); 

McMinnville, City of, Water and Light 

Department (w); 

Oregon Department of— 

Fish and Wildlife (w), 

Forestry (n), 

Geology and Mineral Industries (n), 

Human Resources, Oregon Health Division, 

Drinking Water Program (w), 

Natural Resources, Analysis and Planning 

Management Services Division (w), 


Transportation, Highway Division (w), 


Water Resources (w); 


Oregon State University (g); 

Portland, City of— 

Bureau of— 


Environmental Services (w), 


Water Works (w) 


Pennsylvania 

Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (w); 


Allentown, City of, Engineering Department (w); 


Berks, County of (w); 


Bethlehem, City of (w); 


Bucks, County of (w); 


Chester, County of, Water Resources Authority (w); 


Delaware County Solid Waste Authority (w); 


Delaware River Basin Commission (w); 


Erie, County of, Department of Health (w); 


Harrisburg, City of, Department of Public Works (w); 


Indiana, County of (w); 


Joint Planning Commission of Lehigh-Northampton 


Counties (w); 

Lancaster County Planning Commission (w); 

Letort Regional Authority (w); 

Media Borough Water Department (w); 

New York State Department of Environmental 

Conservation (w); 

Oley, Township of (w); 

Philadelphia, City of, Water Department (w); 

Pennsylvania Department of— 

Environmental Resources— 

Bureau of Community Environmental 

Control (w), 

Bureau of Mining and Reclamation (w), 

Bureau of Soil and Water Conservation (w), 

Bureau of Topographic and Geologic 

Survey (g,n,w), 

Bureau of Water Quality Management (w), 

Bureau of Water Resources 

Management (w); 

Susquehanna River Basin Commission (w); 

University Area Joint Authority (w); 

University of Delaware, Geological Survey (w); 

Williamsport, City of, Bureau of Flood Control (w) 

Puerto Rico 

Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (w); 


Puerto Rico Department of Natural Resources (w); 


Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (w); 


Puerto Rico Industrial Development Company (w); 


Puerto Rico Mineral Resources Development 


Corporation (g); 

Puerto Rico Planning Board (w); 

Virgin Islands Department of Natural Resources (w); 

Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority (w) 

Rhode Island 

Governor's Office of Energy Assistance (w); 


Narragansett Bay Water Quality Commission (w); 


New Shoreham, Town of (w); 


Rhode Island State Department of Environmental 


Management, Division of Water Resources (w); 


State Water Resources Board (w) 


South Carolina 

Beaufort-Jasper County Water Authority (w); 


Charleston Commission of Public Works (w); 


Cooper River Water Users Association (w); 


110 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Donaldson Development Commission (w); 


Georgetown County Water and Sewer District (w); 


Grand Strand Water and Sewer Authority (w); 


Irmo, Town of (w); 


Lexington, County of (w); 


Myrtle Beach, City of (w); 


Oconee County Sewer Commission (w); 


Richland, County of (w); 


South Carolina State— 


Department of Health and Environmental 

Control (w), 

Department of Highways and Public 

Transportation (w), 


Geological Survey (w), 


Public Service Authority (w), 


Water Resources Commission (w); 


South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium (w); 

South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources 

Department (w); 

Spartanburg Sanitary Sewer District (w); 

Spartanburg Water System (w); 

Waccamaw Regional Planning and Development 

Commission (w); 

Western Carolina Regional Sewer Authority (w) 

South Dakota 

East Dakota Water Development District (w); 


Lawrence, County of (w); 


Oglala Sioux Tribe (w); 


Rapid City, City of (w); 


Sioux Falls, City of (w); 


Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe (w); 


South Dakota Department of— 


Game, Fish and Parks (w), 


Transportation (g,w), 


Water and Natural Resources— 


Geological Survey Science Center (w), 


Water Development Division (w), 


Water Quality Division (w), 


Water Rights Division (w); 


South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (w); 


Watertown, City of (w); 


West Dakota Water Development District (w) 


Tennessee 

Alcoa, City of (w); 


Bartlett, City of (w); 


Blountville, City of, Utility District (w); 


Dickson, City of (w); 


Eastside Utility District (w); 


Emergency Management Agency (w); 


Germantown, City of (w); 


Gladeville Utility District (w); 


Hamilton, County of, Office of Emergency 


Management (w); 

Hixson Utility District (w); 

Humphreys County Commissioners (w); 

Jackson, City of, Utility Division (w); 

Lawrenceburg, City of (w); 

Lebanon, City of (w); 

Lincoln, County of, Board of Public Utilities (w); 

McMinnville, City of (w); 

Memphis, City of— 

Department of Public Works (w), 

Light, Gas, and Water Division (w); 

Memphis State University (w); 

Metropolitan Governments, Nashville, City of, and 

Davidson, County of (w), 

Department of Public Works (w); 

Millington, City of (w); 

Murfreesboro, City of, Water and Sewer 

Department (w); 

North Stewart County Utility District (w); 

Rogersville, Town of (w); 

Sevierville, City of (w); 

Shelby, County of, Public Works (w); 

Tennessee Department of— 

Agriculture (w), 

Health and Environment (w)— 

Construction Grants and Loans (w), 


Division of Superfund (w), 


Office of Water Programs (w), 


Transportation— 


Division of Research (w), 


Division of Structures (w); 


Tennessee State Planning Office (w); 


Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (w); 


Union City, City of (w); 


Upper Duck River Development Agency (w); 


Wartrace, City of (w); 


Webb Creek Utility District (w) 


Texas 

Abilene, City of (w); 


Arlington, City of (w); 


Austin, City of (w); 


Bexar-Medina-Atascosa Counties, Water 


Improvement District No. 1 (w); 

Brazos River Authority (w); 

Carrollton, City of (w); 

Coastal Industrial Water Authority (w); 

Colorado River Municipal Water District (w); 

Corpus Christi, City of (w); 

Dallas, City of, Public Works Department (w); 

Edwards Underground Water District (w); 

El Paso, City of, Public Service Board (w); 

Fort Stockton, City of (w); 

Fort Worth, City of, Water Department, Water 

Pollution Control (w); 

Franklin, County of, Water District (w); 

Gainesville, City of (w); 

Galveston, County of (w); 

Garland, City of (w); 

Graham, City of (w); 

Greenbelt Municipal and Industrial Water 

Authority (w); 

Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (w); 

Harris, County of, Flood Control District (w); 

Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence District (w); 

Houston, City of (w); 

Lavaca-Navidad River Authority (w); 

Lower Neches Valley Authority (w); 

Lubbock, City of (w); 

Lunar and Planetary Institute (g); 

Nacogdoches, City of (w); 

North Central Texas Municipal Water Authority (w); 

North Texas Municipal Water District, Research and 

Development (w); 

Northeast Texas Municipal Water District (w); 

Orange, County of (w); 

Pecos River Commission (w); 

Red Bluff Water Power Control District (w); 

Red River Authority (w); 

Runaway Bay, City of (w); 

Sabine River Authority of Texas (w); 

Sabine River Compact Administration (w); 

San Angelo, City of (w); 

San Antonio, City of— 

Department of Environmental Management (w), 

Department of Water Resources 

Management (w), 


Public Service Board (w), 


Water Board (w); 


San Antonio River Authority (w); 


San Jacinto River Authority (w); 


Tarrant, County of, Water Control and 


Improvement District No. 1 (w); 

Texas Water Commission (w); 

Texas Water Development Board (n,w); 

Titus, County of, Fresh Water Supply District 

No. 1 (w); 

Trinity River Authority (w); 

University of Texas (g); 

Upper Guadalupe River Authority (w); 


Upper Neches River Municipal Water Authority (w); 


West Central Texas Municipal Water District (w); 


Wichita, County of, Water Improvement District 


No. 2 (w); 

Wichita Falls, City of (w) 

Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands 

Federated States of Micronesia (w)— 

State of Kosrae (w), 

State of Ponape (w), 

State of Yap (w); 

Northern Mariana Islands, Government of (w), 

Commonwealth of, Utility Commission (w); 

Republic of Palau (w); 

Samoa, Government of (w) 

Utah 

Bear River Commission (w); 


Ogden River Water Users (w); 


Salt Lake City/County Department of Health (w); 


Salt Lake, County of, Division of Flood Control (w); 


Tooele, City of (w); 


Tooele, County of (w); 


University of Utah (g); 


Utah Department of— 


Agriculture, Environmental Quality Section (w), 

Health, Division of Environmental Health (w), 

Natural Resources— 

Geological and Mineral Survey (g,n,w), 


Oil, Gas and Mining Division (w), 


Water Resources Division (w), 


Water Rights Division (w), 


Wildlife Resources Division (w), 


Transportation (w); 

Utah Health Department, Division of Environmental 

Health (w); 

Utah Office of Planning and Budget (n); 

Weber Basin Water Conservancy District (w); 

Weber River Water Users (w) 

Vermont 

Agency of Natural Resources (g,n); 

Department of Environmental Conservation (w) 

Virginia 

Accomack, County of (w); 


Alexandria, City of (w); 


Henrico, County of, Department of Public 


Utilities (w); 

James City, County of (w); 

James City Service Authority (w); 

Loudoun, County of (g); 

Mount Rogers Planning District Commission (w); 

Newport News, City of (w); 

Northampton, County of (w); 

Northern Virginia Planning District Commission (w); 

Prince William Health District (w); 

Roanoke, City of (w); 

Southeastern Public Service Authority of 

Virginia (w); 

Southeastern Virginia Planning District 

Commission (w); 

University of Virginia, Department of Environmental 

Sciences (w); 

Virginia Department of— 

Mines, Minerals, and Energy, Division of Mineral 

Resources (n), 

Transportation (w); 

Virginia Beach, City of, Department of Public 

Utilities (w); 

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 

University (g); 

Virginia State Water Control Board (w); 

Williamsburg, City of (w); 

York, County of (w) 

Cooperators and Other Financial Contributors 111 
Washington 

Bellevue, City of, Public Works Department (w); 


Centralia, City of, Light Department (w); 


Chelan, County of, Public Utility District No. 1 (w); 


Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian 


Reservation (w); 

Douglas, County of, Public Utility District No. 1 (w); 

Hoh Indian Tribe (w); 

King, County of, Department of Public Works (w); 

Kitsap, County of, Public Utility District No. 1 (w); 

Lewis, County of, Board of Commissioners (w); 

Pend Oreille, County of (w); 

Pierce, County of (w); 

Portland, City of, Bureau of Water Works (w); 

Quinault Business Committee (w); 

Seattle, City of, Department of Lighting (w); 

Skagit, County of (w), Department of Public 

Works (w); 

Snohomish, County of (w); 

Tacoma, City of, Department of— 

Public Utilities (w), 


Public Works (w); 


Thurston, County of, Department of— 

Health (w), 

Public Works (w); 

Washington Department of— 

Ecology (w), 

Emergency Management (w), 

Fisheries (w), 

Natural Resources (g,n), 

Transportation (w); 

University of Washington (g); 


Upper Skagit Indian Tribe (w); 


Walla Walla, City of (w); 


Whatcom, County of, Department of Public 


Works (w); 

Yakima Tribal Council (w) 

West Virginia 

Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning and 

Development Council (w); 

Jefferson County Commission (w); 

Morgantown, City of, Utility Board (w); 

Region VII Planning and Development Council (w); 

Research Corporation, Marshall University (w); 

Washington Public Service District (w); 

West Virginia Department of— 

Health, Office of Environmental Health 

Services (w), 


Highways (w), 


Natural Resources, Division of Water 


Resources (w); 

West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey (n,w) 

Wisconsin 

Balsam Lake Protection and Rehabilitation 

District (w); 

Beaver Dam, City of (w); 

Big Muskego Dam Drive (w); 

Chippewa, County of, Land Conservation 

Department (w); 

Dane, County of— 


Department of Public Works (w), 


Regional Planning Commission (w); 


Delavan, Town of (w); 


Fond Du Lac, City of (w); 


Fowler Lake Management District (w); 


Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District (w); 


Green Lake Sanitary District (w); 


Hillsboro, City of (w); 


Lac Courte Oreilles Governing Board (w); 


Little Muskego Lake District (w); 


Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District (w); 


Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin (w); 


Norway, Town of (w); 


Oconomowoc Lake, Village of (w); 


Okauchee Lake Management District (w); 


Oneida Tribe of Indians (w); 


Peshtigo, City of (w); 


Powers Lake, District of (w); 


Pretty Lake Protection and Rehabilitation District (w); 


Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewas (w); 


Rock, County of (w); 


Sand Lake, Town of (w); 


Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning 


Commission (w); 

Stockbridge-Munsee Tribal Council (w); 

Thorp, City of (w); 

University of Wisconsin, Extension, Geological and 

Natural History Survey (n,w); 

Waukesha Water Utility (w); 

Waupun, City of (w); 

Wind Lake Management District (w); 

Wisconsin Department of— 

Natural Resources (w), 


Transportation, Division of Highways (w) 


Wyoming 

Attorney General (w); 


Cheyenne, City of (w); 


Evanston, City of (w); 


Evansville, Town of (w); 


Gillette, City of (w); 


Midvale Irrigation District (w); 


Northern Arapahoe Tribe (w); 


Pinedale, City of (w); 


Shoshone Tribe, Shoshone Business Council (w); 


Teton, County of (w); 


Uinta, County of (w); 


Water Development Commission (w); 


Western Wyoming Community College (w); 


Wyoming Department of— 


Agriculture (w), 

Environmental Quality (w); 

Wyoming State Engineer (n,w); 

Wyoming Water Research Center (w) 

Federal Cooperators 

Central Intelligence Agency (g,n) 

Department of Agriculture 

Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation 

Service (w); 

Forest Service (g,n,w); 

National Agricultural Statistics Service (n); 

Office of International Cooperation and 

Development (w); 

Soil Conservation Service (n,w) 

Department of the Air Force (w) 


Air Force Academy (w); 


Edwards Air Force Base (g); 


Hanscom Air Force Base (g); 


Headquarters, AFTAC/AC (g); 


Kelly Air Force Base (w); 


Occupational and Environmental Health 


Laboratory (w); 

Vandenberg Air Force Base (w) 

Department of the Army (n,w) 


Aberdeen Proving Ground (w); 


Belvoir RD&E Center (g); 


Corps of Engineers (g,n,w); 


Engineer Topographic Laboratory (w); 


Fort Carson Military Reservation (w); 


Intelligence Center and School (n); 


Picatinny Arsenal (w); 


Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg (g); 


White Sands Missile Range (w) 


Department of Commerce 

Bureau of the Census (n); 


National Institute of Standards and Technology (g); 


National Ocean Service (n); 


National Oceanic and Atmospheric 


Administration (g,n,w); 

National Weather Service (n,w) 

Department of Defense Agencies 

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (g); 


Defense Logistics Agency (w); 


Defense Mapping Agency (n); 


Defense Nuclear Agency (g); 


National Guard Bureau (w) 


Department of Energy (g,w) 


Albuquerque Operations Office (w); 


Bonneville Power Administration (w); 


Chicago Operations Office (g); 


Hanford Project (w); 


Health and Environmental Research (g); 


Idaho Operations Office (w); 


Los Alamos National Laboratory (g); 


Nevada Operations Office (g,w); 


Oak Ridge Operations Office (g,w); 


Sandia National Laboratories (g,w); 


Savannah River Operations Office (g,n,w); 


Situ-Field Research, Morgantown, West Virginia (g); 


Test Operations Office, Las Vegas, Nevada (g) 


Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (g,w); 


Bureau of Land Management (g,n,w); 


Bureau of Mines (w); 


Bureau of Reclamation (g,n,w); 


Minerals Management Service (g,n,w); 


National Park Service (g,n,w); 


Office of the Secretary (w); 


Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 


Enforcement (w); 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (g,w) 

Department of the Navy (w) 


Naval Missile Test Center (g); 


Naval Oceanographic Office (g); 


Naval Weapons Center, China Lake (g,w); 


Office of Naval Research (g); 


U.S. Marine Corps (w) 

Department of State 

Agency for International Development (g,n,w); 


Foreign and Nonforeign Governments (g); 


Government of Saudi Arabia (g); 


International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. 


and Mexico (n,w); 

International Joint Commission, U.S. and Canada (w) 

Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration (g,w); 

Maritime Administration (g); 

U.S. Coast Guard (w) 

Department of Treasury 

U.S. Customs Service (n) 

Environmental Protection Agency (g,n,w) 

Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory (w); 

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory (g); 

Office of Environmental Processes and Effects 

Research (g); 

Office of Radiation Programs (g) 

112 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (w) 

Federal Energy Regulating Commission 

Licensees (w) 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

(g,n,w) 

National Science Foundation (g,n,w) 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (g) 

Tennessee Valley Authority (n) 

Veterans Administration (g,w) 

Other Cooperators and 

Contributors 

Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones, 

Colombia (g) 

Government of Saudi Arabia (w) 

Panama Canal Commission (g) 

United Arab Emirates (w) 

University of British Columbia (g) 

University of Otago, New Zealand (g) 

United Nations 

Organization of American States (w); 


United Nations Development Program (w); 


Unesco (g); 


World Bank (g) 


Cooperators and Other Financial Contributors 113 
As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the 

Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and 

natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water 

resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and 

cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the 

enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our 

energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in 

the best interest of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in 

Island Territories under U.S. administration. 

Yearbook Staff 

Eloise Byrd National Mapping Division Coordinator 

Bonnie D'Agostino Geologic Division Coordinator 

Sandye Holmes Water Resources Division Coordinator 

Sandy Jefferson Administrative Division Coordinator 

Marti Quigley Information Systems Division Coordinator 

Arlene Compher Graphic Designer 

Wilma Donald Editor 

Carolyn McQuaig Typographer 

Gail Wendt6 Managing Editor 

The staff of the USGS Yearbook would appreciate comments from readers on this volume. 

If there are features that you particularly enjoy reading or information that you would like to have, 

but is not included, please let us know. Write to: 

Managing Editor 

USGS Yearbook 

119 National Center 

Reston, VA 22092 

114 U.S. Geological Survey Yearbook 1989