U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017 

Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1309

Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—

Circular 1309

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017 

Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—
U.S. Department of the Interior

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

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.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, Facing tomorrow’s challenges—U.S. Geological Survey science in the 

decade 2007–2017: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1309, x + 70 p.
iii

Contents

Foreword .........................................................................................................................................................v

Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................................................vii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................viii

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting Ecosystem Change: 

Ensuring the Nation’s Economic and Environmental Future.....................................................5

Climate Variability and Change: 

Clarifying the Record and Assessing Consequences ..............................................................13

Energy and Minerals for America’s Future: 

Providing a Scientific Foundation for Resource Security, Environmental Health, 

Economic Vitality, and Land Management.................................................................................21

A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program: 

Ensuring the Long-Term Health and Wealth of the Nation......................................................29

The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health: 

A System that Identifies Environmental Risk to Public Health in America...........................39

A Water Census of the United States: 

Quantifying, Forecasting, and Securing Freshwater for America’s Future ..........................47

New Methods of Investigation and Discovery .......................................................................................55

Conclusions...................................................................................................................................................61

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................63

Appendix: Charter for Science Strategy Development; Science Strategy Team..............................67
iv

“USGS is a world leader in the natural sciences 

through our scientific excellence and responsiveness 

to society’s needs.”

USGS Vision Statement
v

Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges— U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Foreword

In 1996, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drafted a strategic plan that considered the 

internal and external drivers and challenges we faced at that time. It was intended as a 10-

year view of the future, establishing goals that would guide the USGS into the next century. It 

served its purpose well—but the drivers and challenges the Nation faces today are markedly 

different from those of 1996, and by 2006 the USGS needed a new strategic science vision. 

The science strategy presented in this document was prepared by the Science Strategy 

Team (SST), a group of USGS scientists selected for its broad range of expertise, experience in strategic thinking, and proven customer relationship-building skills. The charter (see 

Appendix) tasked the SST to develop “... a comprehensive vision, with science goals and 

priorities that unite all bureau capabilities toward challenges for the future ....” The major 

objective was to guide planning over the next decade by identifying opportunities for the 

USGS to better use its remarkable scientific capabilities to serve the U.S. Department of the 

Interior (DOI) and the Nation. The resulting high-level strategy does not reflect all aspects of 

USGS work; in fact, it does not directly deal with the details of many things that the USGS 

does extremely well and that are critical to the mission. The intent is that the science strategy 

will outline areas where natural science can make substantial contributions to the well-being 

of the Nation and the world. This strategy is intended to inform long-term approaches to 

USGS program planning, technology investment, partnership development, and workforce 

and human capital strategies.

This science strategy builds upon a hierarchy of planning documents. It provides a 

science-based response to the overarching DOI strategic plan and is a follow-up to the 1993 

publication, “The U.S. Geological Survey: A Vision for the 21st Century.” The present 

document differs from two previous strategic plans (those of 1995–2005 and 2000–2009), 

which were heavily operational in their focus. The current portfolio of USGS monitoring and 

research efforts has evolved under comprehensive planning processes at a variety of organizational levels. Planning documents have been produced at the discipline, program, center, 

team, and project levels. All of these previous planning efforts contributed to this report. 

The process of developing the strategy was launched at a meeting of the full SST in 

early February 2006. Team members initially reviewed a range of strategy documents from a 

spectrum of governmental and nongovernmental sources. Within the USGS, the SST sought 

input from USGS program coordinators, senior scientists, an advisory group of about 50 

USGS researchers selected for their breadth of expertise, a USGS leadership training class, 

and ultimately, the entire USGS workforce. Subsets of the SST met with groups of employees at several USGS worksites. A Customer Listening Session that focused on developing the 

science strategy was held in Washington, D.C., May 1, 2006, and SST members attended a 

session of the DOI Research and Development Council to brief and obtain information from 

key DOI partners. The SST thanks the many participants inside and outside the USGS for 

putting their time and energy into aiding in the development of this report. 

As they reviewed this enormous amount of material, the SST looked for topics or 

directions that were innovative and transformational, served key clients and customers, had 

long-term national significance, allowed for expanded partnership opportunities, were integrative, and had an obvious USGS role. Ultimately, the choice of strategic science directions 

from within this framework was guided by the view that complexities of measuring, mapping, understanding, modeling, and predicting the status and trends of natural and managed 

resources in the United States transcend the traditional USGS structure and require broad 
vi

Contributors: 

Science Strategy Team

Mark A. Ayers

Water Resources

Jill S. Baron

Biology

Paul R. Beauchemin

Office of Communications

Kevin T. Gallagher

Geospatial Information Office [Co-Chair]

Martin B. Goldhaber

Geology [Co-Chair]

Deborah R. Hutchinson

Geology

James W. LaBaugh

Water Resources

Roger Sayre

Geography

Steven E. Schwarzbach

Biology

Eugene S. Schweig

Geology

June Thormodsgard*

Geography

Charles van Riper III

Biology

William Wilde

Administrative Policy and Services

interdisciplinary thinking and action. The science strategy thus defines priority areas and 

opportunities where the USGS can serve the Nation’s pressing needs. This strategy unites and 

integrates all USGS capabilities and takes advantage of its strengths and unique position as a 

nonregulatory Federal science agency with national scope and responsibilities. Implementing 

these strategic directions will not only enable the USGS to be the best science agency it can 

be but will also strengthen the Nation with the information needed to meet the challenges of 

the 21st century.

*Replacing

Mark DeMulder,

who served on the team from February to May 2006

Mark D. Myers

Director
vii

Abbreviations

BLM ..........................................................................................................Bureau of Land Management

CDC .................................................................................Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CSLF ......................................................................................Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum

DOI ....................................................................................................... U·S· Department of the Interior

EPA ..........................................................................................U·S· Environmental Protection Agency

FEMA ...................................................................................Federal Emergency Management Agency

FWS ..........................................................................................................U·S· Fish and Wildlife Service

GEON ........................................................................................................................ Geoscience Network

GCMRC.........................................................................Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center

IOOS ............................................................................................. Integrated Ocean Observing System

LTER The Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network consists of more than 1,800 

scientists and students collaboratively studying ecological processes over extended 

temporal and spatial scales. The 26 LTER sites cover a diverse set of ecosystems. The 

National Science Foundation established the LTER program in 1980 to support research 

on long-term ecological phenomena in the United States. http://www.lternet.edu/

NASA .........................................................................National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NEON ....................................................................................National Ecological Observatory Network

NIEHS ..................................................................National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

NOAA ....................................................................National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NPS .......................................................................................................................National Park Service

NSF .......................................................................................................... National Science Foundation

NWS ................................................................................................................National Weather Service

SST .....................................................................................................................Science Strategy Team

USFS ............................................................................................................................ U.S. Forest Service

USGS ..................................................................................................................... U.S. Geological Survey
viii

Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting Ecosystem Change:

Ensuring the Nation’s Economic and Environmental Future

In collaboration with others, the USGS reports on the state of the Nation’s terrestrial, freshwater, and 

coastal/marine ecosystems and studies the causes and consequences of ecological change, monitors and 

provides methods for protecting and managing the biological and physical components and processes of ecosystems, and interprets for policymakers how current and future rates of change will affect natural resources 

and society. The USGS works in collaboration with others to understand the distribution, interactions, 

condition, and conservation requirements of organisms in an ecosystem context, and predicts changes to 

biodiversity resulting from land-cover change, climate change, and other impacts to ecosystems. The USGS 

and its partners will advance understanding, through research, of ecosystem structure, function, patterns and 

processes, and will develop new products, including standardized national maps of ecosystems in the United 

States. They will also provide regularly updated reports on the status of ecosystems and assessment of trends 

that will help communities and managers make informed decisions that take into account ecosystem health 

and sustainability.

Climate Variability and Change:

Clarifying the Record and Assessing Consequences

The USGS scientists will meet the pressing needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior, policymakers, and resource managers for scientifically valid state-of-the-science information and predictive 

understanding of climate change and its effects. Studies of the interactions among climate, earth surface 

processes, and ecosystems across space and time will contribute directly to the strategic goals of the U.S. 

Climate Change Science Program. To answer questions about how the world is changing, the USGS will 

expand its already strong research and monitoring initiatives in the science of carbon, nitrogen, and water 

cycles, hydroclimatic and ecosystem effects of climate change, and land-cover and land-use change. The 

USGS will continue studies of paleoclimate and past interactions of climate with landscapes and ecosystems, and apply the knowledge gained to understanding potential future states and processes. Expanded 

and modernized USGS observing networks of land, water, and biological resources will be crucial to rigorous analyses of future responses to climate change. The USGS will provide robust predictive and empirical 

tools for managers to test adaptive strategies, reduce risk, and increase the potential for hydrologic and 

ecological systems to be self-sustaining, resilient, or adaptable to climate change and related disturbances.

In order for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to respond 

to evolving national and global priorities, it must periodically 

reflect on, and optimize, its strategic directions. This report is 

the first comprehensive science strategy since the early 1990s to 

examine critically major USGS science goals and priorities.

The development of this science strategy comes at a time 

of global trends and rapidly evolving societal needs that pose 

important natural-science challenges. The emergence of a global 

economy affects the demand for all resources. The last decade has 

witnessed the emergence of a new model for managing Federal 

lands—ecosystem-based management. The U.S. Climate Change 

Science Program predicts that the next few decades will see rapid 

changes in the Nation’s and the Earth’s environment. Finally, 

the natural environment continues to pose risks to society in the 

form of volcanoes, earthquakes, wildland fires, floods, droughts, 

invasive species, variable and changing climate, and natural and 

anthropogenic toxins, as well as animal-borne diseases that affect 

humans. The use of, and competition for, natural resources on the 

global scale, and natural threats to those resources, has the potential to impact the Nation’s ability to sustain its economy, national 

security, quality of life, and natural environment.

Responding to these national priorities and global trends 

requires a science strategy that not only builds on existing 

USGS strengths and partnerships but also demands the innovation made possible by integrating the full breadth and depth of 

USGS capabilities. The USGS chooses to go forward in the 

science directions proposed here because the societal issues 

addressed by these science directions represent major challenges for the Nation’s future and for the stewards of Federal 

lands, both onshore and offshore.

The six science directions proposed in this science strategy 

are summarized in the following paragraphs. The ecosystems 

strategy is listed first because it has a dual nature. It is itself 

an essential direction for the USGS to pursue to meet a pressing national and global need, but ecosystem-based approaches 

are also an underpinning of the other five directions, which all 

require ecosystem perspectives and tools for their execution. 

The remaining strategic directions are listed in alphabetical order.

Executive Summary
ix

Energy and Minerals for America’s Future:

Providing a Scientific Foundation for Resource Security, Environmental Health, Economic Vitality, 

and Land Management

The USGS energy and minerals resource research will be broadened to contribute more comprehensively to discourse and decisions about future natural resource security, environmental effects of resource use, 

the economic vitality of the Nation, and management of natural resources on U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Federal and other lands. A wide-ranging, multidisciplinary approach is used to understand and evaluate how 

the complex life cycle of occurrence, formation processes, extraction methods, use, and waste products of 

energy and mineral resources influence, or are influenced by, landscape, hydrology, climate, ecosystems, 

and human health. Cumulative knowledge, long-term data, and new understanding of resource origin and 

assessment methodologies will improve the reliability and accuracy of national and global assessments 

and information products, especially as the energy mix evolves and new requirements for rare and scarce 

materials used by the Nation emerge. Information from the USGS resource cycle increasingly will be put in 

economic terms so that policymakers can more clearly weigh competing alternatives. Through partnerships 

and collaborations, USGS natural resource knowledge and expertise helps advance the Nation’s economy and 

improve its competitiveness.

A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program:

Ensuring the Long-Term Health and Wealth of the Nation

The USGS collects accurate and timely information from modern earth observation networks, 

assesses areas at risk from natural hazards, and conducts focused research to improve hazard predictions. 

In addition, the USGS works actively with the Nation’s communities to assess the vulnerability of cities 

and ecosystems and to ensure that science is effectively applied to reduce losses. The USGS will develop 

a national risk-monitoring program, built on a robust underpinning of hazard assessment and research, to 

visualize and provide perspectives at multiple scales of vulnerability and resilience to adverse land change 

and hazards. Accurate observations, focused research, and timely communications will safeguard people 

and property and keep natural hazards from becoming natural disasters.

The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health:

A System that Identifies Environmental Risk to Public Health in America

The USGS can contribute substantially to public health decisionmaking. The USGS monitors wildlife, 

is at the forefront of identifying wild animal disease reservoirs, and maintains critical knowledge about 

wild animal disease transmission to humans, drinking-water contaminants, air-dust-soil-sediment-rock 

contaminants, pathogens in recreational water, and the use of wild animals as sentinels of human health. 

To employ this expertise in support of the Nation’s health needs, the USGS will fully integrate its massive 

data holdings and environmental science expertise to produce a national database and atlas of geology, 

and ecology-sourced diseases and toxicants. Once this atlas is in place, the USGS will partner with allied 

health science agencies to support spatially related health research.

A Water Census of the United States:

Quantifying, Forecasting, and Securing Freshwater for America’s Future

The USGS will develop a Water Census of the United States to inform the public and decisionmakers 

about (1) the status of its freshwater resources and how they are changing; (2) a more precise determination 

of water use for meeting future human, environmental, and wildlife needs; (3) how freshwater availability 

is related to natural storage and movement of water, as well as engineered systems, water use, and related 

transfers; (4) how to identify water sources, not commonly thought to be a resource, that might provide 

freshwater for human and environmental needs; and (5) forecasts of likely outcomes for water availability, 

water quality, and aquatic ecosystem health caused by changes in land use and land cover, natural and 

engineered infrastructure, water use, and climate.
x

The six strategic science directions outlined here are 

themselves interrelated. Their interaction, correlation, 

and interplay reveal the complexity of the Earth’s natural, 

physical, and life systems. Developing new understanding, 

therefore, requires a “systems” approach that calls upon the 

full range of USGS capabilities. The USGS, with its breadth 

of scientific expertise, can provide an important perspective 

on the entire web of interrelated natural processes that affect 

national and global well-being.

Understanding the implications of these intricate 

linkages requires that data and information be readily shared 

among USGS scientists and collaborators, and with our 

Data Integration and Beyond

The USGS will use its information resources to create a more integrated and accessible environment for its vast resources 

of past and future data. It will invest in cyberinfrastructure, nurture and cultivate programs in natural-science informatics, and 

participate in efforts to build a global integrated science and computing platform.

Leveraging Evolving Technologies

The USGS will foster a culture and resource base that encourages innovation, thereby advancing scientific discovery 

through the development and application of state-of-the-art technologies.

The next decade poses formidable challenges, but it also holds unprecedented opportunities for USGS science to improve 

the economic and environmental health and prosperity of people and communities across the Nation and around the world. The 

USGS looks forward to applying the full breadth and depth of its scientific capabilities to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

partners and customers in forms suited to their needs, 

interests, and responsibilities. Thus, expansion of information technology to allow for seamless data and information 

sharing is an important component of the USGS science 

strategy. However, information technology is only one of 

the technological areas that will require continual updating. 

The USGS must keep abreast of advances in areas, such as 

environmental sensors, microbiology, nanotechnology, and 

many others that are now, or will become, critical to the mission. Therefore, the SST has identified two critical crosscutting science directions that are essential for the success of the 

science strategy:
Preface    

Formidable 21st century challenges form the backdrop 

for this U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science strategy. 

Society must deal with a series of national and global trends 

that have major natural-science implications. First, the 

emergence of a global economy affects the demand for all 

resources. The world’s natural resources, and the materials 

produced by people from those resources, are being used 

on a scale that is modifying the terrestrial, marine, and 

atmospheric environments upon which human civilization 

depends. The use of, competition for, and natural threats to 

resources on the global scale will affect the Nation’s ability 

to sustain its economy, national security, quality of life, and 

natural environment. Second, the last decade has witnessed 

the emergence of a new paradigm for managing Federal 

lands—ecosystem-based management. By understanding 

the status of U.S. natural resources, how natural resources 

interrelate and change with time, and how resilient they are 

to future natural and human-caused threats, decisionmakers 

will be able to ensure the security of the Nation, the vitality of its economy, the health of its environment, and the 

well-being of its citizens. Third, the U.S. Climate Change 

Science Program (2005) predicts that the next few decades 

will see rapid changes in the Nation’s and the Earth’s 

environment. Land and resource managers will need to 

understand the local and regional implications of climate 

change, anticipate its impacts, and prepare for expected 

effects to reduce the potential for disaster. Finally, the 

natural environment continues to pose risks to society from 

volcanoes, earthquakes, wildland fires, floods, droughts, 

invasive species, variable and changing climate, and natural 

and anthropogenic toxins, as well as animal-borne diseases 

that affect humans. Some of these risks may be increased 

by changing climate and will be increased by the movement of the Nation’s population into harm’s way in coastal, 

earthquake-prone, and wildfire-prone areas. Understanding 

those health, resource, and hazard risks, better defining their 

probabilities, and forecasting their effect on the status and 

future of society are essential for a resilient and prosperous 

United States.

This decadal USGS science strategy will be implemented at a time when the Nation can benefit greatly by 

using natural science information in its decisionmaking. 

The USGS is well positioned to address the challenge 

of providing this information. It is the Nation’s and the 

world’s leading natural science and information agency. 

The workforce of nearly 9,000 scientists and support staff, 

distributed in about 400 locations, collects and interprets 

data from tens of thousands of hydrological, biological, and 

geological sampling sites throughout the Nation, its coastal 

zones, and Continental Shelves; these efforts, combined 

with its extensive remote-sensing capabilities, allow the 

USGS to map and understand Earth processes and changes. 

The USGS is uniquely suited to address the broad scope of 

natural-resource and natural-science issues facing the U.S. 

Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Nation, by using 

scientific tools at scales ranging from microscopic to global. 

The USGS brings a special set of temporal perspectives 

that range from deep geologic time to recent historic scales, 

and, with its predictive capabilities, to look to the future. 

The USGS does not have regulatory or land-management 

responsibility and has a worldwide reputation for objective, unbiased science. For the 127 years of its existence, 

the USGS has used its earth-science expertise to provide 

decisionmakers at all levels of government and citizens in 

all walks of life with the information and tools they need 

to address pressing societal issues and to help ensure the 

sustained health, welfare, and prosperity of the Nation. Over 

the last decade, the USGS: enhanced the Nation’s understanding of the causes and the impact of natural hazards, 

wildlife disease, invasive species, and climate change; deepened the Nation’s understanding of the economics related to 

water use and the potential for abundant high-quality water; 

contributed to the creation of new industries in minerals and 

gas hydrates; and provided for the testing of new theories 

of land management and prevention of loss through the 

availability of long-term information and a national array of 

interdisciplinary monitoring activities that includes remote 

sensing, imaging, seismic monitoring, streamgaging, and 

field study. The USGS maintains a broad scope of research 

activities and long-term data sets, such as:

• information relating to natural hazards, including 

earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, landslides, and 

coastal erosion; energy and mineral resources; and 

geologic processes that affect the Nation’s land and 

coasts;

• real-time flood data and information on the quality 

and quantity of surface- and ground-water resources;

• information critical to animal health, identifying 

and dealing with invasive species, biological species 

management, and ecosystems; and

• geospatial data, topographic maps, and satellite 

images critical to emergency response, Homeland 

Security, land-use planning and resource management.

As outlined in the body of this report, the USGS can 

build upon previous strengths and achievements by leveraging its talents and skills to undertake comprehensive and 

integrated studies that examine the Earth as a system in 

which biosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere 

are interrelated. This report recommends implementing a 

series of six science directions that were chosen to build 

on existing strengths and to optimize the USGS response 

to major natural science issues facing DOI and the Nation 

during the next decade. The Science Strategy Team (SST) 

considered a broad spectrum of information from inside 

and outside the USGS before deciding on the directions to 

Introduction 1
    Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

emphasize. All these areas of emphasis are already being 

researched to some extent within the USGS, but the challenges of the future call for a substantial increase in, and 

integration across, disciplines of the current levels of 

effort. Central to the SST deliberations on the content of 

each of the six directions was a structured framework that 

addressed the need to (1) identify and measure key variables, (2) map the resulting data spatially, (3) understand 

the fundamental natural science processes involved, (4) 

monitor essential variables over time, (5) predict or forecast 

the future course of natural science events, and (6) engage 

stakeholders in the use of this information for problemsolving. Implementation of the strategic directions, likewise, will address these themes. The strategic directions 

are listed below. The ecosystem strategy is listed first. The 

remaining strategic directions are presented in alphabetical 

order.

Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting

Ecosystem Change

• A new, comprehensive focus on terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal/marine ecosystems will be implemented. Knowledge of ecosystems is critical to the 

well-being of the Nation because ecosystems provide 

the natural resources and other goods and services 

that humans require. Understanding, mapping, 

monitoring, modeling, and advising DOI and the 

Nation on ecosystems are critical to balance land-use 

and land-change issues with human needs. Ecosystem 

studies require the full power of an integrated 

systems approach and thus are a perfect fit with 

USGS capabilities and strengths. During the next 

decade, the USGS will emphasize the fundamental 

research, mapping, and monitoring necessary to 

assess the Nation’s ecosystem function, as well as 

begin to document and forecast change. Working 

with partners, the USGS will develop new products, 

including standardized national maps of ecosystems 

in the United States and regularly updated status and 

trends assessments, that will help communities and 

land and resource managers make informed decisions 

about sustainable resource use. The ecosystem 

strategy outlined in this report has a dual nature. It is 

itself an essential direction for the USGS to pursue in 

order to meet a pressing national and global need, but 

ecosystem-based approaches also underpin the other 

five directions, which all require ecosystem perspectives and tools for their execution. 

Alpine tundra is projected to be vulnerable to changing climate. Here, scientists are collecting soils for chemical analysis. Loch Vale 

Watershed, Rocky Mountain National Park. Photograph by M. Hartman.
Climate Variability and Change

• The USGS scientists will meet the pressing needs of 

the U.S. Department of the Interior, policymakers, 

and resource managers for scientifically valid stateof-the-science information and predictive understanding of climate change and its effects. Studies of the 

interactions among climate, earth surface processes, 

and ecosystems across space and time will contribute directly to the strategic goals of the U.S. Climate 

Change Science Program. To answer questions about 

how the world is changing, the USGS will expand 

its already strong research and monitoring initiatives 

in the science of carbon, nitrogen, and water cycles, 

hydroclimatic and ecosystem effects of climate 

change, and land-cover and land-use change. The 

USGS will continue studies of paleoclimate and past 

interactions of climate with landscapes and ecosystems, and apply the knowledge gained to understanding potential future states and processes. Expanded 

and modernized USGS observing networks of land, 

water, and biological resources will be crucial to rigorous analyses of future responses to climate change. 

The USGS will provide robust predictive and empirical tools for managers to test adaptive strategies, 

reduce risk, and increase the potential for hydrologic 

and ecological systems to be self-sustaining, resilient, 

or adaptable to climate change and related disturbances. 

Energy and Minerals for America’s Future

• Two issues will dominate the energy and minerals 

resources picture in the future. One is the potential 

for domestic scarcity driven by global economic circumstances. The other is the likelihood that environmental impacts from energy and mineral extraction 

and consumption will factor more strongly into how 

we use resources. The strategy for future research in 

these areas is to link the resource and environmental 

sides of an expanded set of energy and mineral issues 

into a set of comprehensive resource “life cycle” studies. 

A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience

Assessment Program

• The USGS is positioned to prepare the Nation to more 

effectively plan for, and deal with, natural hazards by 

implementing a national hazards risk and resilience 

assessment program. The USGS will enhance its 

ability to collect the critical information from modern earth-observation networks and deliver the data 

in real time, and we will expand its role as a primary 

source of the research to improve hazard assessments 

and predictions. In addition, the USGS and its partners in academia will work actively with the Nation’s 

communities to assess the vulnerability of cities and 

ecosystems and to ensure that science is effectively 

applied to reduce losses. This risk and resilience 

assessment program will become an indispensable 

national asset over the next decade.

The Role of Environment and Wildlife in

Human Health

• Nothing is more important to the Nation than the health of 

its citizens. A recent report by the National Health Statistics Group, at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services of the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, projects that U.S. health spending will continue 

to rise, reaching 20 percent of the gross domestic product 

by 2015 (Borger and others, 2006). The environment is 

one of the major determinants of human health. The USGS 

has the most comprehensive databases, sampling programs, 

and research programs, not only for determining national 

backgrounds of natural and anthropogenic toxins but, 

equally important, for understanding the processes by 

which these materials migrate through the environment. 

Zoonotic diseases (those transmitted from animals to 

humans), such as avian flu and West Nile virus, are 

major concerns in the United States and abroad. USGS 

biologists and ecologists have played a major role and 

will continue to do so in providing information to health 

professionals on the biologic pathways involved in 

disease transmission. The USGS will fully integrate its 

massive data holdings and produce a national database 

and atlas of geology, and ecology-sourced diseases and 

toxicants. Once this atlas is in place, the USGS will 

partner with allied health science agencies to support 

spatially related environmental health research.

A Water Census of the United States

• Water issues are critical to the Nation. A U.S. General 

Accounting Office (2003) report from July 2003 stressed 

that we do not have an adequate picture of water availability at national, regional, and local levels. The report 

stated, “National water availability and use has not been 

comprehensively assessed in 25 years.” The Council of 

State Governments (2003) recently reported, “Water, 

which used to be considered a ubiquitous resource, is 

now scarce in some parts of the country and not just 

in the West as one might assume. The water wars have 

spread to the Midwest, East, and South as well.” Water 

“...conflicts are occurring within states, among states, 

between states and the federal government and among 

Introduction    
    Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

environmentalists and state and federal agencies.” Tribal 

governments “... are pursuing several legal battles to 

reclaim their water rights.” Indeed it is time for a comprehensive water census of the United States, and the 

USGS will undertake this effort.

The six strategic science directions outlined above are 

themselves interrelated. Their interaction, correlation, and 

interplay reveal the complexity of the Earth’s natural, physical, and life systems. Therefore, developing new understanding 

requires a “systems” approach that calls upon the full range of 

USGS capabilities. The systems approach is the major underlying theme of the entire USGS science strategy. Because climate 

affects all life on earth, the expanded USGS climate studies 

are inevitably linked to ecosystem, health, water, hazards, and 

energy issues. The USGS energy and minerals strategy will be 

broadened to deal not only with resource availability, but also 

with a broad spectrum of related land, water, and environmental 

concerns. This of necessity links the energy and minerals strategy to the USGS ecosystem, water, and climate studies. 

The USGS, with its breadth of scientific expertise, can 

provide an important perspective on the entire web of interrelated 

natural processes that affect national and global well-being. To 

fully realize the extent and implications of these intricate linkages, this science strategy also identifies two cross-cutting science 

directions that are essential to the success of future USGS science: data integration, in which accessibility of data and information crosses multiple disciplines, geographic, temporal, and 

political boundaries to reach scientists, collaborators, partners, 

and customers in forms suited to the needs, interests, and responsibilities of each; and leveraging evolving technologies, in which 

innovative sensors and technologies have the potential to transform not only scientific methods, but also the questions that scientists ask. The USGS must keep abreast of advances in areas, such 

as environmental sensors, microbiology, nanotechnology, and 

many others that are now, or will become, critical to the mission.

The societal issues that these science directions address pose 

major challenges for the Nation’s future and for the stewards of 

Federal lands. These directions will require the full breadth and 

depth of USGS energies and skills. The scope of each science 

direction is such that the USGS will need to work with partners to 

achieve all of its goals. Yet those goals can only be fully achieved 

by building on the foundation provided by the broad span of scientific expertise found in the USGS. The ability to explore these 

science directions across local, state, and national scales will enable 

the USGS to provide needed information to decisionmakers that 

is appropriate to the level of the challenges they face. Equally 

essential for decisionmakers will be the objectivity and credibility 

of the scientifically rigorous information that is a hallmark of the 

USGS, along with its unbiased, nonregulatory perspective. The 

USGS chooses these science directions not because they are easy 

but because they are critically important, will require the best of 

the organization to fulfill, and will provide information needed for 

solutions to the challenges facing the Nation.

The USGS is a public agency. Public support of science is 

primarily justified by three rationales (Sarewitz and others, 2004):

• Scientific advance is necessary to solve particular societal 

problems;

• Scientific advance provides the information necessary 

for making effective decisions; and

• Scientific advance is necessary to create new wealth.

Throughout its 127-year history, the USGS has contributed 

substantially to the national well-being in all these areas. The 

implementation of this science strategy over the next decade 

will strengthen and enhance this tradition of science in service 

to the U.S. Department of the Interior and to the Nation.

Mallik gas hydrate production test research project, 2002, in the Mackenzie Delta of the Canadian Arctic: The location was chosen because 

the research site has a high concentration of known gas hydrates. The project was conducted by an international consortium, including the 

U.S. Geological Survey, Geological Survey of Canada, U.S. Department of Energy, Japan, India, Germany, and the energy industry.
Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting 

Ecosystem Change: 

Background

Ecosystems constitute the Earth’s biosphere and support 

human existence. The plants, animals, microbes, and physical 

products from ecosystems provide people, as components of 

those ecosystems, with the energy, water, biomass, medicine, 

and mineral resources needed to sustain human societies. 

Resilient, functioning ecosystems build soil, enhance pollination of crops, purify water, provide raw materials, regulate the 

atmosphere, cycle nutrients, and detoxify waste. These and 

other ecosystem services collectively provide the basis for all 

life on Earth.

For terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal/marine ecosystems 

to continue providing these benefits, human interactions with 

ecosystems need to be well managed, especially in the face of 

increasing global pressures. A proactive approach to managing 

ecosystems will require an advanced understanding, gained 

through research, of ecosystem structure, function, condition, 

and distribution. The ability to project future ecosystem states 

in response to societal pressures is vital to ensuring that ecosystems continue as the essential life-support systems for the 

Earth. Understanding ecosystems and predicting ecosystem 

change requires robust scientific assessments and modeling 

of ecosystem conditions as climate and human-induced land 

changes occur. There is a need to catalog and describe the set 

of human activities that impact ecosystems. Effectively managing ecosystems requires communication of the results from 

those analyses in a form useful for decisionmakers.

Ecosystems are inherently “interdisciplinary,” with geographical, biological, geological, hydrological, and other components. The USGS is the only Federal agency that combines 

scientific expertise in biology, hydrology, geology, and geography and thus is uniquely positioned to advance understanding 

of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, and predict 

ecosystem change. The USGS, DOI’s science bureau, provides 

science information not only to Bureau of Land Management, 

National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other 

land- and resource-management agencies, but to others throughout the world whose needs for integrated ecosystem science are 

growing as they increase their emphasis on sustainability and 

ecosystem-based management. In addition to forming an excellent science foundation for managing ecosystems across the 

Nation, the information, understanding, and tools and systems 

approach provided by this strategic direction will serve as a 

critical underpinning for the other USGS science directions.

There are many linkages between ecosystems and the other 

science strategies described in this science vision for USGS. For 

example, the effects of natural hazards can be greatly exacerbated by unstable ecological conditions. Debris flows from 

earthquakes or storms are made worse in the absence of vegetative cover on hillsides. The infilling of wetlands and subsequent 

build-up of infrastructure reduces the buffering capacity of 

coasts from hurricanes. Energy and mineral development can 

drastically alter local environments, as in the case of mountain-top mining and energy production, major contributors of 

greenhouse gas emissions. Development, resource use, and 

ecosystem modification alter and often increase the exposure of 

humans and wildlife to vectors of disease and contamination. 

Although there is often public conflict between uses of freshwater for societal and environmental needs, there is also growing 

recognition that the environmental uses of freshwater provide 

priceless services of purification, flood control, fish and shellfish provision, recreation, and spiritual renewal. Ecosystems not 

only directly respond to changing climate, but strongly affect 

global climate through feedbacks in surface reflectance and 

water and heat regimes. The distribution pattern of ecosystems 

on earth and the ability of ecosystems to cycle and store carbon 

and water are increasingly recognized as crucial components of 

the Earth’s climate system.

Ecosystems are also inherently “multiscalar,” spatially 

and temporally. They are usually recognized and managed at 

site-specific (local) scales, but are also described at broader 

scales from regional to global. Many natural resource conservation programs focus on ecosystems as an ecologically meaningful geographic area within which to assess, monitor, and 

understand biodiversity (species and populations) in terrestrial, 

freshwater, and marine environments.

Ensuring the Nation’s Economic and Environmental Future 


 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Strategic Focus

In the coming years, the USGS will develop a priority 

focus on ecosystem science. As with other USGS programs, 

it will draw from, and expand upon, the agency’s strengths in 

monitoring, research, modeling, and geospatial representation. 

The USGS will become recognized as the Nation’s source for 

ecosystem science in support of decisionmaking and ecosystem management strategies at multiple scales. The goal will 

be to develop and convey a fundamental understanding of ecosystem distributions, and their components and dynamics, for 

terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems. Research will 

be conducted at a range of place-based scales, and results from 

this work will contribute to national-scale assessments. The 

Statement of Strategic Science Direction

Large-scale, rapid change is now taking place in all natural systems throughout the world. Growing human populations 

and substantial alterations to landscapes, oceans, and the atmosphere have caused widespread changes in the global distribution and abundance of organisms. Changes in biodiversity alter 

ecosystem processes, productivity, and structure, and often 

reduce the resilience of ecosystems to future environmental 

change. Permafrost melting, landscape fragmentation, mining 

scars, forest clearing, and coral reef bleaching are just some of 

the many examples of ecosystem change. People value ecosystems in their own right, and as they decline, or even collapse, 

the environmental foundations upon which human society has 

been built may begin to erode.

Effective management of ecosystems and natural 

resources depends on a thorough knowledge of the types and 

distributions of ecosystems and their attributes, in concert 

with a comprehensive understanding of ecosystem processes 

and function. However, understanding of ecosystem condition, change, and causes of change is currently hampered 

by incomplete knowledge of the connections between and 

among species, including humans, and the environment. The 

United States currently lacks scientifically sound indicators of 

ecosystem condition, comprehensive maps of ecosystem distributions, and a rigorous ecosystem monitoring program. As a 

result, changes in ecosystem condition, whether for better or 

worse, will likely not be recognized, diagnosed, or understood 

at a national scale. These deficiencies hamper the Nation’s 

ability to understand, forecast, and mitigate ecosystem change, 

assess ecosystem vulnerability to human activities, and avoid 

damage to regional and global ecosystems.

The state and fate of ecosystems and the services that 

they provide to human societies, previously of interest mainly 

to earth scientists and environmentalists, are rapidly emerging as a global concern of citizens, governments, and industry. 

There is an increasing need to identify adaptation and mitigation outcomes for climate-sensitive ecosystems; understanding 

how ecosystems evolve by adapting to change has become 

one of the cornerstones of the U.S. Climate Change Science 

Program. Recent reports by blue-ribbon panels, including 

the Heinz Center Report on the State of the Nation’s Ecosystems (Heinz Center, 2002, 2006), the Millennium Ecosystem 

Assessment (2005), and the report of the U.S. Commission on 

Ocean Policy (2004), call for coordinated and comprehensive 

ecosystem monitoring and management. The National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), a new 30-year National 

Science Foundation initiative, has been established to study 

ecosystem dynamics in a set of reference sites representative 

of the Nation’s major ecosystem types. There is growing realization that it is impossible to separate economic development 

from the environment and that environmental degradation can 

undermine economic development.

Ecosystem management, defined as a strategy for the 

integrated management of land, water, mineral, energy, and 

living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable 

use in an equitable way (United Nations Environment Program/Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000), has emerged 

as a key component of the sustainable development paradigm. 

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) and the State 

of the Nation’s Ecosystems reports (Heinz Center, 2002, 2006) 

conclude that many ecosystems are compromised in their 

ability to provide the goods and services that sustain human 

societies. These reports, and a growing awareness of the critical links between people and their environment, underscore 

the importance of ecosystems for healthy societies.

In collaboration with others, the USGS monitors and reports on the state of the Nation’s terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, and studies the causes and consequences of ecological change, provides methods for protecting and managing the biological and physical components and processes 

of ecosystems, and interprets for policymakers how current and future rates of change will affect 

natural resources and society. The USGS works in collaboration with others to understand the 

distribution, interactions, condition, and conservation requirements of organisms in an ecosystem 

context, and predicts changes to biodiversity resulting from land-cover change, climate change, 

and other impacts to ecosystems. The USGS and its partners will advance understanding, through 

research, of ecosystem structure, function, patterns and processes, and will develop new products, including 

standardized national maps of ecosystems in the United States. They will also provide regularly updated reports 

on the status and trends of ecosystems that will help communities and managers make informed decisions that 

factor ecosystem health and sustainability into the decision process.
Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting Ecosystem Change   

understand, monitor, predict, and engage” framework, and will 

develop around several key themes:

· Research on how ecosystems work, and how and why 

they change;

· Development of a national geospatial ecosystems model 

that makes use of improved understanding of the relations 

among the biological (including species, natural communities, 

and land cover) and nonbiological (including physiography, lithology, hydrography, and climate) components of 

ecosystems, to provide decisionmakers and stewards of 

Federal and other lands with the means to better anticipate 

the consequences of changes in ecological processes or 

human activity on the ecosystems under their care;

· Monitoring of national ecosystem status and trends 

through use of objective, scientifically based indicators;

· Development of techniques for managers to use in 

managing, protecting, restoring, and evaluating ecosystems and the services that they provide; 

· Development of ecotoxicological methods and techniques to measure, test, and evaluate the impact of 

continuing and emerging contamination threats to ecosystems and their biological components in terrestrial 

and aquatic environments; and

· Development of assessment tools that will enable a 

better understanding of ecosystem properties and processes for use in decisionmaking about the health and 

welfare of human societies and the environment.

Groundwater

Soils

Macroclimate

Topoclimate

Landform

Surface water

Ecosystem

Biota

Bedrock

USGS ecosystem research will seek to answer several fundamental questions that underpin ecosystem science: (1) How do 

ecosystems work? (2) What are the appropriate indicators of 

ecosystem condition? (3) How are ecosystems changing? (4) 

What are the causes of these changes? (5) What are the probable consequences of these changes? (6) What are the consequences of different ecosystem management approaches? (7) 

What science support decisionmaking and management tools 

can be offered to policymakers, managers, and stakeholders?

At national scales, the USGS and partners will develop a 

comprehensive, standardized geospatial ecosystem framework 

to support the mission of land management in America, and 

will establish a nationwide ecosystem monitoring program. 

They will develop and use critical indicators of ecosystem 

condition to provide regional and national assessments of 

ecosystem status and trends and will conduct basic and applied 

process research to understand the causes, consequences, and 

mechanisms of ecosystem change. Research will emphasize 

understanding the range of variability, both historical and 

human-driven, that can be accommodated by ecosystems 

before they experience irreversible change. The scientific 

basis for describing baseline conditions, as well as effective 

methods of monitoring, remediating, and restoring contaminated ecosystems, will be developed. Methods for protecting, 

mitigating, restoring, or adapting to human-caused and natural 

change will be developed, tested, and disseminated. The 

USGS will evaluate, forecast, and communicate the direction 

and uncertainties associated with ecosystem change beyond 

critical thresholds.

The USGS ecosystem science strategy, like all the strategies in this report, will be conceptualized in a “measure, map, 

What is an Ecosystem?

An ecosystem is an integrated system of organisms interacting with their physical environment. The cycling of energy and 

materials through these organisms and their environments (including 

soil, sediment, water, and the atmosphere) is a key ecosystem process. 

The distribution, composition, and abundance of organisms in space and 

time, the nature of their physical environment, the processes that support them, and the manner in which they respond to natural and humandriven change are the principal foci of ecosystem science. Ecosystems 

provide a framework for understanding the diversity of the Earth’s 

physical and biological processes. Because organisms interact with the 

physical environment at all scales on Earth, from microbes around tree 

roots to the global biosphere, the boundaries around specific ecosystems 

are by definition a human construct. Nevertheless, defining discrete ecosystem units can be useful for management or conservation purposes.

The vertical structure of an ecosystem, showing the spatial integration of 

biological and nonliving components. Reproduced with permission from 

Robert G. Bailey (1996), Ecosystem Geography, Springer-Verlag, New York.
 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Strategic Actions

To provide science and decision-support tools for policymakers, resource managers, and the public, and to enable these 

stakeholders to better anticipate and predict the outcomes of 

their decisions, the USGS, in collaboration with partners, will:

· Conduct basic, place-based research into ecosystem 

structure, function, and processes. Characterize and 

quantify: (a) interactions between the biological and 

nonbiological components of ecosystems; (b) natural 

and anthropogenically caused ranges of ecosystem variability; (c) ecosystem biogeochemistry and soil ecology; 

(d) biodiversity conservation requirements; (e) ecological needs for water; (f) consequences of change to 

ecosystem components and processes; (g) the ecology of 

invaders, factors in the resistance of habitats to invasion, 

and methods to prevent and control invasive species 

so as to minimize their environmental impacts; (h) the 

effects of multiple interacting stressors at different levels 

of biological organization and temporal and spatial 

scale; and (i) vulnerabilities of the Nation’s species and 

natural communities to stressors, including land-use 

practices, climate change, contaminants and invasive 

pests, diseases, and competing species.

· Coordinate, develop, and regularly update scientifically 

rigorous, standardized, geospatial classification models 

and maps of national ecosystems at scales appropriate 

Elves Chasm, one of the many hanging gardens within the Grand 

Canyon. Photograph by Jeffrey Lovich, U.S. Geological Survey.

Ecosystem Monitoring Partnerships

The value society places on healthy ecosystems has 

led to a need for national and global ecosystem monitoring 

initiatives. Global ecosystem monitoring and reporting on levels 

of ecosystem protection are mandated by the intergovernmental 

Convention on Biological Diversity. Another intergovernmental 

protocol seeks to classify and subsequently map standardized 

global ecosystems as part of the Global Earth Observation System 

of Systems (GEOSS); USGS is the global task leader for this priority activity. Nationally, there are ongoing and emerging efforts 

to develop environmental indicators for routine statistical reporting on the state of the Nation’s environment: examples include 

the Heinz Center State of the Nation’s Ecosystems assessment, 

the National Ecosystem Observation Network (NEON), and the 

Council on Environmental Quality’s Collaborators on Indicators for the Nation’s Environment (CEQ/CINE) initiative. The 

USGS can make substantial contributions to all of these efforts. 

The Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service 

have expressed interest in ecosystems as a standardized land unit 

basis and environmental context for assessing Federal lands. The 

USGS will partner with key Federal agencies, intergovernmental consortia, and national and international nongovernmental 

organizations to ensure that the best scientific information about 

ecosystems is available for decisionmakers.
Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting Ecosystem Change 

to land-manager needs, to facilitate the ability to assess, 

monitor, manage, and restore ecosystems, as well as 

anticipate the outcome of changes in ecological processes or human activity on those ecosystems. Test different ecosystem classification and mapping approaches 

to investigate their utility for different management 

applications. Develop national ecosystem maps from a 

study of the connections between physiographic setting, 

geologic setting, climate, hydrologic regime, biogeochemistry, ecological processes and biotic distributions 

and interactions. Conduct long-term research on these 

relations at a set of reference study sites representative of major ecosystems in the nation, using existing 

long-term study sites [for example, LTER (Long-Term 

Ecological Research), NEON (National Ecosystem 

Observation Network), and existing USGS and other 

U.S. Government agency sites, such as U.S. Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Experimental 

Forests] and new sites to fill ecosystem representation 

gaps. Conduct complementary research at sites where 

substantial changes have occurred to identify changes 

unique to human-affected systems, thereby using the 

reference sites to distinguish among changes from 

human effects and changes expected due to the natural 

variability inherent in such systems, or changes due to 

biological perturbations, such as invasive species.

· Identify ecosystems vulnerable to ongoing changes 

of climate, contamination, and land use. Quantify the 

consequences of ecosystem and land-use change to 

water quality and quantity, health, hazard risk, biodiversity, and other ecosystem services to human society. 

Seney National Wildlife Refuge, Michigan. Source: John and Karen Hollingsworth obtained photograph from U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Digital Library system.

Eastern Land Change

Land change, the modification of the cover, use, and management of land, is one of the most obvious of all environmental changes. Land change results from natural forces and human actions; however, contemporary land change has largely 

been the result of human modifications. To better understand the status of ecosystems, the USGS is currently documenting the 

rates, causes, and consequences of contemporary land-cover and land-use change across the United States. Results of the analysis 

of the Eastern United States between 1973 and 2000 illustrate the complexity of the geography of land change. The average overall 

amount of Eastern U.S. land change between 1973 and 2000 was 12.5 percent, meaning that 207,000 km2 of the 1.65 million km2

area changed one or more times. However, the average amount masks the geographic variability of change, which ranged from a 

low of 2.0 percent in the Blue Ridge ecoregion to a high of 24.9 percent in the Southern Coastal Plain ecoregion. Most change was 

connected primarily to timber harvesting and urban growth. Across the East, agricultural lands are being converted to forest or are 

reverting to forest due to agricultural abandonment. Urban expansion, as measured by the increase in developed cover, is expanding 

and accelerating across the East. Other land-cover types, such as mining, water, and wetlands, are changing, but the rates of change 

are modest. The local importance of those changes may best be understood at the ecoregion level.

The consequences of the change on ecosystems are important. Land change alters the structure and function of ecosystems and 

can limit the availability of goods and services that are essential for ecosystem health and societal well-being. Land change directly 

impacts habitat quality and biodiversity, provides pathways for the spread of invasive species, and affects atmospheric chemistry, 

weather and climate, water quality and quantity, and other environmental systems. Because the resilience of ecosystems varies geographically, understanding change in a geographical and ecosystems framework is essential for managing the consequences of change.
10 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Evaluate spatially explicit trends in ecosystem change. 

Identify environmental thresholds that signal transitions 

between ecosystem states. Advance understanding of 

the historical impacts (backcasting) of land-use change 

on ecosystems by documenting past land-use/land-cover 

conditions from historical remotely sensed imagery.

· Develop a multipartner, robust assessment of the status 

and trends of the Nation’s ecosystems. Work with State 

and Federal agencies and other entities to form a National 

Advisory Committee on Ecosystem Information that will 

develop objective and rigorous indicators of ecosystem 

condition and publish regular assessments of ecosystem 

condition and trends in a nationally coordinated, regularly 

updated series of regional ecosystem assessments.

· Expand and modernize USGS observing networks by 

using new and emerging technologies for long-term 

observations of the physical and biological resources 

that directly and indirectly respond to land-use/landcover change, climate, contaminants, and other drivers 

of ecosystem structure and function. Adopt and implement the National Science and Technology Council’s 

Committee on Environment and Natural Resources 

(National Science and Technology Council, 1997) 

national environmental monitoring framework to assess 

and monitor ecosystems (1) at key, long-term, representative sites (for example, NEON, LTER, and USDA 

Forest Service Experimental Forests), (2) in a spatially 

extensive set of field locations (for example, National 

Water-Quality Assessment sites, Environmental Assessment and Monitoring Program sites, Breeding Bird Survey sites, and Landfire sites), and (3) through remotely 

sensed extrapolations of point data on ecosystems to 

regional ecosystem distributions and processes.

· Develop credible forecasts of responses to ecosystem 

stressors, including land use, climate change, contaminants, invasive species, and other threats to ecosystems, 

thus applying new knowledge of the thresholds that signal 

ecosystem decline and collapse. Use this information 

to develop “alternative ecosystem futures” scenarios, 

with well-defined uncertainty assessments that integrate 

biophysical, economic, social, and policy drivers. Develop 

scenarios of possible changes in species ranges and ecosystem distributions caused by changing climate environments using a geospatial ecosystem model that links 

the connections among physiographic setting, geologic 

setting, climate, hydrologic regime, biogeochemistry, 

ecological processes, and biotic distributions and interactions. Forecast possible ecosystem “migrations” by linking 

climate change models, models of current ecosystem distributions, and research-derived understanding of climate 

controls on ecosystem distributions.

· Work with DOI partners to evaluate and test restoration 

or mitigation methods and technologies for increasing 

ecosystem resilience to disturbances. Develop quantitative and standardized metrics with which to evaluate 

Land use has dramatically altered the distribution and composition 

of forest lands in the Eastern United States, changing the structure 

and function of these ecosystems. The extensive loss of bottomland 

hardwood forests, for example, has affected water quality, increased 

the risks of flood, and altered the distribution and abundance of animals 

that depend on these forests, such as the ivory-billed woodpecker.

success or failure of restoration techniques in different 

types of ecosystems. Provide a public-access delivery 

system for integrated geospatial data that can be used to 

delineate user-specific ecosystems.

Vision of 2017

The USGS is the Nation’s source for integrated science and 

assessment in support of ecosystem management in America. 

USGS scientists collaborate with others to provide definitive 

information on the nature, pattern, rates, and causes of ecological 

change across the Nation and on the consequences of change 

to human health and safety, ecosystem function and resilience, 

and the resources upon which human societies are built. A collaborative effort, led by USGS, provides regular assessments 

of the state of the Nation’s ecosystems. These assessments of 

ecosystem conditions and trends inform decisionmaking on a 

routine basis. USGS science and methods provide the basis for 

continued conservation of natural and managed ecosystems, and, 

along with critical information on ecosystem functioning, 

underpin restoration efforts as well. In-depth understanding of 

ecosystem processes is integrated into simulation models that 

enable scientists and managers to forecast future ecosystem conditions. Comprehensive, multiscaled, online digital maps of the 

Nation’s ecosystems and their physical and biological components 

are routinely used for management, education, and portrayal of 

change over time. Real-time ecological data, images, maps, and 

research findings are available to the public on interactive USGS 

Websites, along with scientific explanations of the state of 

ecosystems that are useful for scientists, for policymakers, and 

for the public.
Understanding Ecosystems and Predicting Ecosystem Change 11

Power generation

Sediment,

Fluvial geomorphology

Flow, temperature

Water quality

River recreation

experience

Cultural

Resources

Fish

Vegetation

Food base

Reproduction

Competition/predation

Disease/parasites

Habitat

Systemic Decline Campsites

Navigation

Climate and Dam Operations

Beach/Fine Substrate Coarse Substrate

Conceptual model of the physical, biological, recreational, 

and cultural connections of the Colorado River ecosystem 

below Lake Powell. USGS scientists with expertise in 

archeology, fisheries, geospatial mapping, hydroclimatology, 

hydrology, sediment geology, and plant, animal, and aquatic 

ecology work together to understand the river system and 

provide managers with the best possible interpretations of 

how the system functions.

The Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park. Photograph by 

Jeffrey Lovich, U.S. Geological Survey.

riparian vegetation, and protection of cultural resources of the 

Grand Canyon. Fisheries biologists add knowledge of sediments to information on food webs, water temperature, and the 

movements of nonnative species that prey on young humpback 

chub to develop a comprehensive picture of the dynamics of 

endangered fish populations. Terrestrial ecologists use maps and 

information on sediment movement to interpret the patterns of 

native and nonnative vegetation, such as tamarisk. Surveys of 

wildlife-vegetation interactions are used to monitor the populations of endangered Kanab ambersnails and southwestern 

willow flycatchers.

The Colorado River ecosystem from Lake Powell to Lake 

Mead is managed in an ecosystem context as part of the Grand 

Canyon Resource Protection Act of 1992. GCMRC is the cornerstone of the Glen Canyon Adaptive Management Program 

mandated by the Act. In addition to monitoring and basic 

research, adaptive management includes experiments, such as 

experimental flows, where scientists work together to evaluate 

physical, biological, and cultural responses to different management techniques. Already the results of the different experiments are providing new knowledge about ecosystems, and the 

findings are being included in management decisions. Common 

databases and frequent interactions among GCMRC scientists 

and their collaborators enable them to develop essential scientific information for optimizing the myriad uses and ecosystem 

needs of the Colorado River.

Integrated Ecosystem Science for Colorado 

River Management: A Case Study

The Colorado River is one of the most highly regulated 

and heavily used river systems in the world. Two principal 

reservoirs, Lakes Powell and Mead, along with 49 other large 

reservoirs, store and release water according to equations 

designed to maximize hydroelectric generation and to sustain 

cities, industry, and agriculture in an arid region. More than 30 

million people depend on Colorado River water. The Colorado 

River Compact of 1922, negotiated by the seven basin States 

and the U.S. Government, divided use of Colorado River water 

between the upper and lower basin. All the water in the river 

was allocated to various societal uses. Water allocations were 

made during the wettest 10-year period in recorded history; 

paleoclimatic reconstructions and historical measurements have 

shown that the long-term average flow is 20 to 25 percent less 

than the amount of water allocated by the Compact. Today, 

with increasing demand for western water and recognition of 

the effects of river regulation on native fishes, riparian vegetation, estuarine wetlands, and the Sea of Cortez, the Colorado 

River faces many challenges.

The Colorado River and its watershed make up a system; changes upstream affect species and processes downstream. The Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center 

(GCMRC), an integrated USGS facility, is working to understand the important section from Lake Powell through the 

Grand Canyon to Lake Mead. Hydrologists and hydroclimatologists monitor past and current trends in river flow and provide 

interpretations and forecasts that are used by river managers to 

regulate flow. Water-quality experts report on the temperature 

and nutrient and contaminant loads of Lake Powell and the Colorado River downstream. These data are used by the National 

Park Service for the health and safety of visitors to Lake 

Powell, and, along with flow records, provide crucial information for management of the Colorado River ecosystem below 

Glen Canyon Dam. Research efforts focus on defining causal 

relations and identifying relations among physical, biological, recreational, and cultural processes. Sediment geologists 

using models, remote sensing, and innovative change-detection 

techniques calculate sediment budgets that are used to identify crucial habitats for endangered humpback chub and other 

fishes. Sediment transport 

patterns are critical 

to the stability 

of sand bars 

and beaches 

for camping, 
12 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

European green crabs in their natural habitat are smaller 

than those in invaded habitat. Photograph by Jeff Goddard, 

University of California, Santa Barbara.

Otter photograph by Bryant Austin, California Fish and Game

Invasive species can rapidly and seriously degrade the quality of 

natural and managed lands and waters by altering natural processes and reducing biodiversity. Certain species, such as tamarisk, have dramatic effects on regional water balances; others, 

such as cheatgrass, permanently shift disturbance regimes from 

infrequent to annual fires, which suppress the native vegetation 

while allowing introduced grasses to flourish. Control methods 

that land managers use may also affect habitat. High-quality scientific studies on invasive species are urgently needed by DOI 

and other Federal land management agencies, Tribes, States, 

and communities throughout the United States and around the 

world. The USGS needs to take an interdisciplinary approach to 

create ecological forecasting models of harmful species distribution and effects and to develop an early detection and assessment capability for the Nation.

The consequences of altered biodiversity may be farreaching to ecosystems and human societies. Disturbance 

regimes, feedbacks to climate, and cycling of nutrients and 

water are all influenced by the traits and diversity of organisms. Scientists are only beginning to understand the consequences of changes in biodiversity on ecosystems and the 

services they provide to human societies.

Extinctions and Invasions — 

Threats to Biodiversity

The Nature Conservancy calculates that one-third of the 

plant and animal species in the United States are at risk of 

extinction (The Nature Conservancy and the Association for 

Biodiversity Information, 2000). Extinction rates throughout 

the world are estimated to be 100 to 1,000 times their pre-human 

levels (Pimm and others, 1995). Species invasions have 

dramatically expanded with the world’s increased globalization. 

What are the ecosystem consequences of these alterations 

in biodiversity?

Extinction is one way in which biodiversity influences 

ecosystems. Localized extinctions or significant changes in 

abundances may have large effects on ecosystem function. 

The hunting of sea otters to the brink of extinction by Russian 

fur traders in the 1800s resulted in the subsequent collapse of 

Pacific coastal kelp forests, which were grazed away by sea 

urchins released from sea otter predation. This same ecological event is now repeating off the western coast of Alaska, 

although the dramatic removal of sea otters during the last 

decade has been by killer whales. Killer whales shifted prey 

about 10 years ago from seals and sea lions to sea otters 

(Estes, 1998). The resulting loss of kelp forests in Western 

Alaska is accompanied by population declines in fish supported by kelp beds and in fish-eating marine birds.

Insectivorous birds include more extinction-prone species than any other group of birds (Sekercioglu and others, 

2004). The loss or decline of insectivorous birds in locations 

from orchards to coffee plantations results in increases in 

insect pests and plant damage. As invertebrate pests develop 

resistance to insecticides, and as pesticide use is restricted for 

other reasons, the ecosystem service provided by insect-eating 

birds is increasingly valued. Scavenging birds are important 

in the recycling of nutrients, leading other scavengers to dead 

animals and limiting the spread of disease to human communities. In 1997 more than 30,000 of the world’s 50,000 rabies 

deaths took place in India, where feral dog and rat populations 

had exploded after the introduction of a new drug for cattle 

caused a precipitous decline in vulture populations.

Introductions of species to ecosystems can be as destructive and almost as hard to reverse as extinctions of species. 
Climate Variability and Change: 

Background

Climate influences every aspect of life on earth, affecting human health and well being, water and energy resources, 

agriculture, forests and natural landscapes, air quality, and 

sea levels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

(IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report of 2007 summarizes 

overwhelming evidence that global warming, due to human 

activities since 1750, is unequivocal. In addition to increases 

in global average air and ocean temperatures, observations 

find widespread melting of snow and ice, rising sea levels, 

widespread changes in precipitation amounts, ocean salinity, wind patterns and increasing occurrences of extreme 

weather, including droughts, heavy precipitation, heat waves, 

and intensity of tropical cyclones (Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change, 2007). Objective and interdisciplinary 

science is needed to understand more clearly the complexity 

of global climate issues. The science will play an essential role 

during the next decade in helping communities and land and 

resource managers understand local and regional implications, 

anticipate effects, prepare for changes, and reduce the risks of 

decisionmaking in a changing climate.

With its long-term observational networks, extensive 

databases, and diverse scientific expertise, the USGS can 

provide the broad perspective needed to expand understanding of current climate variability, climate change, and their 

effects on the Nation’s resources and economy. The USGS is 

working with local, State, and Federal partners to understand 

past climate variability and deliver credible future forecasts of 

climate-change effects on land, water, ecological and biological resources. DOI partners and other land and resource managers will benefit from its wealth of data, predictive models, 

and decision-support capabilities as they face the challenge 

of adapting to, or mitigating the risks of, climate change on 

ecosystems, biota, land and water resources, and communities 

across the Nation and around the world.

Clarifying the Record and Assessing Consequences

13
14 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Statement of Strategic Science Direction

The USGS scientists will meet the pressing needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior, policymakers, 

and resource managers for scientifically valid state-of-the-science information and predictive 

understanding of climate change and its effects. Studies of the interactions among climate, 

earth surface processes, and ecosystems across space and time will contribute directly to the 

strategic goals of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program. To answer questions about how 

the world is changing, the USGS will expand its already strong research and monitoring initiatives in the science of carbon, nitrogen, and water cycles, hydroclimatic and ecosystem effects 

of climate change, and land-cover and land-use change. The USGS will continue studies of paleoclimate and past interactions of climate with landscapes and ecosystems, and apply the knowledge gained to 

understanding potential future states and processes. Expanded and modernized USGS observing networks 

of land, water, and biological resources will be crucial to rigorous analyses of future responses to climate 

change. The USGS will provide robust predictive and empirical tools for managers to test adaptive strategies, reduce risk, and increase the potential for hydrologic and ecological systems to be self-sustaining, 

resilient, or adaptable to climate change and related disturbances.

Climate change from massive and rapid restructuring 

of the global carbon cycle is one of the greatest global-scale 

experiments of all time, defined half a century ago as “a 

large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not 

have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future” 

(Revelle and Suess, 1957). Although climate change is a 

natural, continuous Earth process, global climate cycles 

are now clearly being perturbed by increasing greenhouse 

gas emissions from human activities (U.S. Climate Change 

Science Program, 2005). Climate variability and warming 

over the past century have already had measurable effects 

on ecosystems, societies, economies, and health. Climate 

change contributes to sea level rise and to the frequency 

and intensity of wildfires, floods, crop failures, and 

outbreaks of disease and insect damage. Even though 

average precipitation is increasing as the climate warms, 

changes in the amount, timing, and distribution of rain, 

snow, and runoff are challenging the ability to manage 

the Nation’s water supply. In the Arctic, where the average temperature has risen at almost twice the rate of the 

rest of the world since 1950, shoreline erosion, permafrost 

melting, and ecosystem changes are drastically reshaping 

landscapes, habitats, and economies. Projected changes 

in temperature and precipitation patterns in response 

to increasing greenhouse gas emissions throughout the 

twenty-first century are expected to intensify the effects 

on species, ecosystems, societies, economies, and health 

in many areas of the world (Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change, 2007).

The consequences of global climate change and 

increasing carbon dioxide are of increasing public concern, and with good reason. The direct effects of warming, 

including heat-related deaths, such as those that occurred 

in Chicago in the 1990s or in Europe in 2006, are compounded by myriad indirect effects of climate change on 

various societal infrastructures, such as power blackouts 

and increasingly variable water supplies in many parts of 

the country. The barrage of media coverage of the consequences uncovered by scientists, from increasing disease 

outbreaks to acidification of the oceans, is now a daily 

occurrence. Complex and nonlinear physical, chemical, 

and biological interactions are becoming an increasingly 

important focus for climate change assessments and basic 

research (Burkett and others, 2005). As an example, nonclimatic variables, such as land use, fertilization or pollution, 

and variance in the way species respond to environmental 

factors, all combine to influence the way ecosystems 

respond to climate. When interactions among components 

of a system are not directly proportional, the system is 

considered nonlinear. Nonlinear relations are more common 

than not, but there is little insight into when biological 

thresholds will be crossed, much less on the implications 

for species, ecosystems, and the services society expects 

from the environment. Scientific insight into the direct and 

indirect, including nonlinear, effects of climate change on 

local and regional resources ought to be the catalyst for 

changes in planning and management of land, water, and 

other natural resources in the United States and elsewhere. 

If we can understand the linkages, we can better manage 

and adapt. During the next decade, the United States 

and other nations need to develop scientifically rigorous 

response strategies in anticipation of climatic events that 

are directional and increasingly variable. These strategies 

need to be proactive, effective, and adaptable. USGS will 

work closely with its many partners to produce the understanding and the tools necessary to anticipate, mitigate, or 

adapt, thereby minimizing the effects of climate change.

The USGS occupies a strong and unique role in the U.S. 

climate change science community and contributes directly 

to the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). USGS 

is recognized for its research and monitoring efforts in the 

fields of hydrology, climate history, land-use and land-cover 

change, wildlife health, ecosystem science, carbon and other 

geochemical and nutrient cycles. The USGS contributes 
Climate Variability and Change 15

Climate Change in Alaska

Arctic climate is warming rapidly and will 

continue to do so. Warming in the Arctic is causing changes 

in nearly every physical and biological process, and the 

consequences to wildlife, vegetation, people, and infrastructure are already being observed. Temperatures have increased 

sharply in recent decades, especially in spring and winter. 

River discharge has increased, spring snowmelt occurs 

earlier, snow cover has declined, and rainstorms are increasing. These changes have altered the delivery of carbon and 

nutrients from landscapes to aquatic ecosystems. Permafrost 

is warming, melting, and retreating northward. Given the 

large spatial variability in the rates and extent of physical 

change, current monitoring is inadequate (Arctic Climate 

Impact Assessment, 2004).

The ability to monitor, and thus understand, the responses 

of vegetation, animals, and ecosystem processes to these 

physical changes also is inadequate. Treeline and tundra are 

expected to move north and to higher elevations. Although 

expanding forests may store more carbon aboveground from 

the atmosphere, warmer soils may release as much carbon or 

more (Wickland and others, 2006; Striegl and others, 2005). 

Insect outbreaks and wildfires are likely to increase in severity. 

Reductions in sea ice are shrinking marine habitat for polar 

bears, ice-inhabiting seals, and some seabirds. Species ranges 

directly to the CCSP’s intellectual framework of whole-system 

understanding of global change, including the interrelationships among climate change, ecological systems, and human 

activities. USGS long-term data sets together with its breadth 

of multidisciplinary scientific expertise—spanning geology, 

biology, hydrology, geography, and remote sensing—enables 

it to deliver integrated information, predictive scenarios, and 

technological tools for managing the Nation’s water, land, 

plant and animal populations more effectively. Over the next 

decade, the USGS climate-change program will improve the 

integration and utility of climate-change research results to 

land and water management agencies. 

are expected to move northward, bringing new species to the 

Arctic—and animal diseases that also may affect people (West 

Nile virus, avian influenza). Broad arrays of observations will 

be needed to understand what climate change means to these 

vast yet variable landscapes.

A principal focus of USGS research in boreal forests 

and the Arctic is based on the hypothesis that the soils there, 

which contain large amounts of carbon, could release substantial amounts to the atmosphere as soils warm and microbial 

decomposition converts the soil organic matter to carbon 

dioxide and methane. Both of these are greenhouse gases. It is 

plausible that the rates of emission from vast areas in Canada, 

Alaska, and Siberia could approach, within an order of magnitude or so, the rates of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil 

fuel burning. Given this prospect, additional monitoring and 

research are highly warranted.

The challenge is to understand which landscapes are 

more or less responsive to climate change and how such landscapes will change over the coming decades (Arctic Climate 

Impact Assessment, 2004).

Arctic warming also poses serious threats to existing and 

planned infrastructure. Shoreline communities and facilities 

are increasingly exposed to storms and shoreline erosion. 

Thawing ground is disrupting transportation, buildings, and 

pipelines. Winter periods when ice roads and tundra are sufficiently frozen to permit travel have already declined from 

Photograph of thermokarst and dying forests on the Tanana Flats in central Alaska 

taken in 1999 by Torre Jorgenson.

200 days to 100 days per year in some 

parts of Alaska, affecting oil and gas 

extraction and forestry industries 

(Hinzman and others, 2005). Monitoring networks to measure and minimize the hazards to communities and 

industries are either nonexistent or so 

widely spaced that they provide mere 

anecdotes instead of comprehensive 

information (Arctic Climate Impact 

Assessment, 2004).

A concerted and sustained USGS 

effort in Alaska, launched as part 

of the 2007 and 2008 International 

Polar Year, will establish and operate 

physical and biological monitoring 

networks, increase scientific collaborations within and outside the USGS, 

and clearly communicate findings.
16 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Strategic Focus

The USGS will apply its traditional strengths in monitoring, research, integration, modeling, and analysis to help 

the Nation understand and prepare for climate change and 

its effects. By drawing on scientific strengths in land surface dynamics, sea level and coastal dynamics, hydrologic 

dynamics, and ecosystem dynamics, three strategic areas of 

monitoring, research, and assessment will form the foundation of the USGS climate change strategy:

(1) Monitoring: Shifts in abundances, distribution, 

behavior, phenology, and genetic makeup have been 

documented in a number of species in response to changing 

climate. Populations tend to shift their distributions poleward or upward in altitude, or as in some species in the 

Arctic, landward, as sea ice diminishes. A systematic 

effort to monitor and document these changes will allow 

the possibility that ecosystem management may be able to 

compensate and manage for resilience. USGS will develop 

new assessment biological techniques to be applied to 

species, populations, and physical variables within and 

between ecosystems with climate change as the major 

variable in common. USGS also will continue to gather and 

analyze information about land-cover and land-use change, 

water, earth surface processes, species, and ecosystem function, and integrate these into the National Climate Change 

Response research program. The long-term data records 

for which USGS is so highly respected are the underpinnings of understanding and insight into the interaction of 

climate with the Earth’s physical and biological environment. By collaborating with other agencies and scientists, 

and serving as the clearinghouse for multiagency monitoring 

networks that collect climate-change-effects information 

across public lands, USGS will be able to answer questions 

about how the world is changing for the science community, 

public, and managers of public lands. One example is to 

develop, with partners, a national-scale understanding of 

baseline physical and biological soil characteristics as a 

basis for evaluating their responsiveness and resistance to 

climate change and other anthropogenic influences. USGS 

will establish altitudinal transects at different latitudes 

within the United States to begin systematic and coordinated examination of changes in plants and animals and the 

physical environment for ecosystem managers of vulnerable environments. Altitudinal transects would be patterned 

after, and coordinated with, GLORIA, the international 

Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments that measures range expansions and contractions in 

mountains worldwide. Through monitoring and analysis, 

USGS will provide a steady stream of descriptive and 

interpretive products in hydrology, glaciology, land cover, 

landscape, geochemistry and biogeochemistry, sea-level 

changes, phenology, species distributions, and ecosystem 

function. 

(2) Research: The USGS will conduct research to 

advance the knowledge of processes that are crucial to 

predicting the future evolution of global climate and to 

understand the land, water, environmental, and societal 

consequences of changing climate. This research includes 

improving understanding of the terrestrial carbon cycle, 

especially in rapidly changing arctic, alpine, and boreal 

environments, understanding how disruptions of other 

major biogeochemical cycles, such as nitrogen, interact 

with carbon cycle changes in a wide range of ecosystems, 

and understanding the effects of changes in land-surface 

interactions and hydrologic systems (rivers, ground water, 

and soil moisture) because of shifting patterns of precipitation and temperature. With a focus on environmental 

consequences, research will emphasize the linkages 

between climate and land-use change on biogeochemical 

cycles, disturbance frequency, land-surface processes, and 

biodiversity and species interactions in terrestrial, aquatic, 

and marine environments. Mechanistic models will be 

developed to portray understanding of global change processes at all scales from point-scale to global. Studies of 

the probability and consequences of abrupt changes and 

thresholds will be used to clarify the nature of change and 

the effects on the environment and society. For example, studies of the thresholds and potential ecosystem health effects 

of climate change are critical to DOI’s understanding and 

management of the Nation’s treasured natural resources.

A National Phenology Network

Phenology is the study of the times of recurring natural biological phenomena, especially in relation 

to climate. It is recording when the first robin arrives in 

the spring, or when the lilacs bloom. Records of shifts in 

phenology, or seasonal timing of flower development or 

other vegetation changes, animal migrations, hibernations, 

and the seasonal activity of cold-blooded animals, do more 

than simply provide powerful indicators of climate variability and change. Variations in phenology have consequences 

for individuals and can scale up to broader ecological 

dynamics. Spatially replicated phenological studies at the 

continental scale can reveal much about the ecology and 

status of species, communities, and ecosystems (Post, 

2003). The timing of pollen and spore production influences human health. The ability of pollinators to arrive at 

the right time affects agricultural productivity. Large-scale 

patterns of response to climate can be detected with a 

national phenology network. This type of information will 

become increasingly important to natural resource managers as they develop scientifically appropriate responses to 

climate change (Inouye and others, 2000; Betancourt and 

others, 2005). The USGS will work with other agencies, 

nongovernmental organizations, and universities to implement a national phenology network and develop the tools to 

analyze the data at multiple scales.
Climate Variability and Change 17

Climate Change Response: Enhanced 

Assessment of Temperate Ecosystems

A system of long-term transects that compose an enhanced 

and systematic assessment of the ecological, hydrological, and 

climatological variables associated with a warming climate 

will be used to document and gather data to model and predict 

changes in vulnerable ecosystems and populations. This 

systematic method of studying response to climate change 

will include a complexity of responses and scales, and will 

involve multiple tools and disciplines from genetics to demography to remote sensing within and across ecosystems. USGS 

will collaborate with universities and other partners to set up 

a series of landscape-scale permanent transects from low to 

high elevations, repeated at different latitudes from subtropic 

to boreal (width to be determined). These large-scale transects 

will permit USGS scientists to look at the center and margins 

of species ranges, as well as coordinate climate-change studies 

of responses in a range of ecoregions and their transition 

zones. The transects will include vascular and nonvascular 

plants, vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife, and the physical 

environment. This systematic effort will allow a synthetic 

overview for major ecosystems of the United States and allow 

for predictive modeling of ecological responses to climate 

change in the United States.

(3) Assessment: USGS will develop forecasting tools, 

including simulation models and adaptation methodologies, which resource managers can use to test management 

options for, and potential effects on, land, water, biological and ecosystem resources. This assessment will require 

integration of disciplinary research in the development of 

complex models of ecosystem dynamics and land-surfacevegetation processes. Feedbacks and linkages between 

water, land use, soil, ecosystems, and climate change will 

be studied and modeled at a range of scales so that understanding and interpretations can be useful to resource 

managers, policymakers, and the public at local, regional, 

and national levels. Existing watershed and ecosystem scale 

process models will continue to be refined and applied to 

sites and regions of interest to resource managers. Simulations of coupled continental and global scale land-surface, 

ocean, and atmospheric processes will continue to inform 

global climate models about crucial feedbacks between the 

atmosphere, biosphere, and oceans. Models and methodologies are not perfect predictors of future events, and as such 

the levels of confidence and uncertainty with which they 

are intended to forecast the potential effects will need to be 

fully communicated. For example, important questions we 

face in defining climate-change effects on water resources 

are related to the potential changes in the timing and 

amounts of runoff, ground-water recharge and discharge, 

snowpack, and soil moisture decades into the future. It is 

critical that information about climate uncertainties, in 

conjunction with other factors, such as land-use and wateruse changes, be included into forecasting tools to better 

plan for the development and management of America’s 

future water resources. The same is required for ecosystems, 

landscapes, coastal systems, energy development, and 

human health.

Nearly all climate change scenarios assume the global 

supply of primary energy will grow and continue to be 

dominated by fossil fuels until at least the middle of the 

century. This means the concentration of carbon dioxide 

in the atmosphere will continue to increase. Greater 

understanding of the global carbon cycle may improve 

understanding of ways by which carbon can be effectively 

removed from the atmosphere and safely stored and 

otherwise sequestered. Carbon capture and storage options 

have the potential to reduce overall mitigation costs and 

perhaps increase the flexibility in achieving greenhouse 

gas emissions reductions, but many questions remain 

regarding the geological and geochemical conditions for 

optimal storage. Potential technical storage methods are 

in oil and gas fields, unminable coal beds, and deep saline 

formations (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 

2005). The USGS possesses critical expertise for developing the scientific understanding necessary to storing carbon 

in geologic reservoirs.

The DOI is directly responsible for managing 1 out 

of every 5 acres of land in the United States, including 

vast water, ecosystem, and other trust resources. DOI is on 

the front line of response and decisionmaking regarding 

climate change and its complex implications for management of multiple resources. The diverse analytical skills of 

USGS will be brought to bear in providing understanding 

and tools for land and resource managers to be effective in 

a world where it is less certain how the climate is changing. 

The concept of stationarity—that the recent past is a good 

predictor of the future—no longer holds. There is a need to 

develop new, process-based constructs to answer resource 

Calving glacier. Source, Steven Schwarzbach, U.S. Geological 

Survey.
18 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

planning and management questions. What scientifically 

grounded understanding can USGS provide to the Bureau 

of Reclamation and others for planning and managing 

water resources? How can managers of the National 

Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge increase the 

resilience of populations and ecosystems in their care to 

climate-related disturbances? What do we need to know 

regarding the structure and function of the Nation’s soils 

to manage them under changing climates? What are the 

interactions between climate and disease that influence wildlife, forest, and human health? What are the interactions 

between climate change, energy resource extraction, and 

feedbacks to the environment on DOI lands? Where are the 

geologic formations most conducive to safe and effective 

geologic carbon storage? These kinds of questions illustrate 

the breadth of topics USGS can contribute to across the 

Nation, and also emphasize the linkage of the climate change 

science strategy with all other science strategy directions. 

Within climate change science, USGS has a timely and 

urgent opportunity to contribute directly to the present and 

future health and welfare of the Nation. 

Strategic Actions

• Create, expand, and modernize existing USGS 

observing networks using new and emerging technologies for long-term observations of the physical 

and biological resources that directly and indirectly 

Tents dot the Greenland landscape at a research camp in July 

2006. Scientists from many organizations, including the USGS/

NSF National Ice Core Laboratory, are working on the National 

Science Foundation’s West Antarctic Ice Sheet Divide Project to 

collect deep ice cores in central West Antarctica during 2007–09. 

The cores provide information, such as temperature, precipitation, 

atmospheric gas composition, and volcanic eruptions that help 

researchers better understand the changing climate. Photograph 

by Brian Bencivengo, U.S. Geological Survey.

respond to climate. Explicitly design observational 

transects for ecosystem response to climate change 

along altitudinal gradients at different latitudes on 

Federal lands within the United States that integrate 

hydrological, climatological, chemical, and biological 

variables into a national assessment of ecosystem, 

species, and population responses to climate 

change—observed and predicted.

• Provide national-scale integration of multiagency 

monitoring networks that collect information on 

climate-change effects across public lands, especially those managed by DOI, and make these data 

and their synthesis products widely and publicly 

accessible.

• Report regularly on the Nation’s environmental and 

natural resource condition and response to climate 

change. Evaluate and interpret regional and national 

trends, potential thresholds, and consequences of climate change to decisionmakers, emphasizing what 

is known and what is uncertain about effects on the 

Nation’s land, water, and ecosystems and their biota.

• Increase understanding through research of the direct 

and nonlinear interactions between climate and 

physical, chemical, and biological forces that influence the structure and functioning of ecosystems 

and the goods and services they provide. At local to 

regional scales, understand the implications for plant 

and animal species, landscapes, and human communities; at the global scale, understand the implications to climate, biosphere, and oceans.

• Continue and expand hydroclimatological research 

to understand the feedbacks between climate and 

hydrology that affect the timing, intensity, and duration of floods and droughts, the effects of changing 

seasonal snowpacks, and how these relate to water 

quality and freshwater supplies for society and the 

environment.

• Reconstruct climate paleohistory and climate-related 

ecological, biological, and physical responses, building on current strengths, to understand patterns of 

natural variability and provide a baseline to better 

understand changes currently taking place, as well 

as future scenarios.

• Enhance understanding of the linkages between 

climate and the major biogeochemical cycles in soil, 

vegetation, freshwater, and oceans. In addition to the 

carbon cycle, studies of the interactions of carbon 

with nitrogen, phosphorus, and water are crucial. 

Participate in national and international efforts to 

develop and improve models of global systems that 

include land surface–atmosphere-ocean linkages, 

ice–albedo feedbacks, permafrost processes, vegeta-
Climate Variability and Change 19

tion change linkages to land surface properties, and 

landscape change. Through research and modeling, 

provide the scientific understanding for evaluating options to manage carbon sources and sinks by 

identifying the size, variability, and potential future 

changes to reservoirs and fluxes of carbon within the 

Earth system. 

• Develop adaptation and mitigation methodologies 

with resource management partners, particularly 

in DOI, that can be used to minimize the effects 

of directional and nonlinear climate change on the 

Nation’s land, water, ecosystems, and biological 

populations.

• Continue to refine, apply and interpret watershed and 

ecosystem process models to assist the Nation’s natural 

resource managers to adapt to climate change. Deliver 

USGS predictive modeling and decision-support capability that resource managers can use to forecast the 

120 ?W 105 ?W 90 ?W 75 ?W

30 ?N

45 ?N

120 ?W 105 ?W 90 ?W 75 ?W

30 ?N

45 ?N

NUMBER OF DAYS/YEAR WITH MEAN TEMPERATURES

IN THE RANGE: -3C < Tavg < 0C

[from 1950-1999 VIC 1/8-degree INPUT DATA]

DAYS PER YEAR

0 20 40 60 80

120 ?W 105 ?W 90 ?W 75 ?W

30 ?N

45 ?N

120 ?W 105 ?W 90 ?W 75 ?W

30 ?N

45 ?N

EXPECTED NUMBER OF DAYS/YEAR WITH MEAN TEMPERATURES

RAISED ABOVE FREEZING BY PROJECTED WARMINGS IN 2050

[from 1950-1999 VIC 1/8-degree INPUT DATA]

DAYS PER YEAR

0 15 30 45 60

USGS researchers are developing maps of vulnerability 

to increased warming. Knowledge about how climate 

change affects seasonal snowpacks can be used to forecast 

future changes in timing and amount of river flow and 

other ecological responses by vegetation and wildlife that 

rely on snow for moisture and shelter. Using temperature 

change projections for 2050, maps can be produced that 

project the potential number of days above freezing for 

the Nation. Maps like these will become valuable tools for 

natural resource managers and decisionmakers needing to 

anticipate a wide range of outcomes, from water supplies to 

insect and disease outbreak conditions to wildlife migratory 

patterns.

responses of policy and management decisions on land, 

water, biological, and ecosystem resources because of 

changes in land use and land cover, natural and engineered infrastructure, and climate.

Vision of 2017

The USGS scientists use decades of observational data 

and long-term records to interpret the consequences of climate 

variability and change to the Nation’s biological populations, 

ecosystems, and land and water resources. USGS scientists 

provide expert advice on risks to infrastructure, human safety, 

and environment based on years of collaboration among 

scientists thinking across disciplinary lines. USGS regional 

and national assessments of critical resource interdependencies 

are used, discussed, and interpreted by policymakers, natural 

resource managers, and the public to make decisions on a 

daily basis.

Hydroclimatology

A number of recent studies have documented 

the effects of warming trends over the past 50 years on 

hydroclimatology. In the Western United States, there has 

been less snow and a shift toward more rain (Knowles 

and others, 2006), earlier spring snowmelt (Stewart and 

others, 2005), less spring snowpack (Mote, 2003), and 

earlier greening of vegetation (Cayan and others, 2001). 

Similar hydroclimatic changes also have been observed 

in the Northeastern United States, where snow melts 1 to 

2 weeks earlier now than 100 years ago (Hodgkins and 

Dudley, 2006; Huntington and others, 2004). By documenting the number of days historically close to freezing, 

Energy and Minerals for America’s Future: 

Background

Reliable, accessible, and adequate supplies of energy and 

mineral resources are essential to sustain the American 

economy and standard of living. The Nation faces increasing 

demand for energy and mineral resources, a growing dependence 

on resources imported from other countries, increasing pressure 

to consider alternative sources, and a need to minimize environmental effects associated with resource development and 

use. The Annual Threat Assessment of the Director of National 

Intelligence before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed 

Services (28 February 2006) highlights threats to energy security 

as playing an increasing role in national policy. Yet energy also 

is at the nexus of global environmental issues because of the 

linkage between energy production and greenhouse gas emissions. Mineral resource supply issues are currently (2007) less 

visible than energy but are no less critical to the Nation’s future. 

Like energy, mineral resource development and use are affected 

by environmental concerns.

During the next decade, the Federal Government, industry, 

and other groups will need to better understand the domestic 

and global distribution, genesis, use of and consequences of 

using these resources to address national security issues, manage 

the Nation’s domestic supplies, predict future needs, anticipate 

as well as guide changing patterns in use, facilitate creation of 

new industries, and secure access to appropriate supplies. 

Providing a Scientific Foundation for Resource Security, Environmental Health, Economic Vitality, and Land Management

21
22 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

The USGS energy and minerals resource research will be broadened to contribute more comprehensively to 

discourse and decisions about future natural resource security, environmental impacts of resource 

use, the economic vitality of the Nation, and management of natural resources on U.S. Department 

of the Interior, Federal and other lands. A wide-ranging, multidisciplinary approach is used 

to understand and evaluate how the complex “life cycle” of occurrence, formation processes, 

extraction methods, use, and waste products of energy and mineral resources influence, or are 

influenced by, landscape, hydrology, climate, ecosystems, and human health. Cumulative knowledge, 

long-term data, and new understanding of resource origin and assessment methodologies will 

improve the reliability and accuracy of national and global assessments and information products, especially 

as the energy mix evolves and new requirements for rare and scarce materials used by the Nation emerge. 

Information from the USGS resource cycle increasingly will be put in economic terms so that policymakers 

can more clearly weigh competing alternatives. Through partnerships and collaborations, USGS natural resource 

knowledge and expertise helps to advance the Nation’s economy and improve its competitiveness.

Energy and mineral resource assessment and research 

are a traditional strength of the USGS. USGS science that 

describes the status and trends of these resources provides 

impartial, robust information necessary for the U.S. Department 

of the Interior (DOI) to support its missions of managing the 

Nation’s energy and minerals while simultaneously acting 

as steward of the Nation’s land, water, and environmental 

resources. Collectively, this information advances the scientific 

understanding of these resources at local to global scales, 

facilitates the strategic use and evaluation of resources, thereby 

contributing to the economic health of the Nation, and leads 

to more effective management of the Nation’s land, water, and 

natural resources.

Energy and mineral resources are the backbone of human 

food supplies, shelter, economies, and national security. The 

United States is the largest user of mineral commodities and 

energy resources in the world, and its economy and standard 

of living depend on them. Every year, about 25,000 pounds of 

new nonfuel mineral materials from the earth must be provided for every person in the United States just to maintain 

the current standard of living (Dorr and Paty, 2002). Because 

many of these resources are imported from trading partners 

around the world, the Federal Government, industry, and other 

groups need to understand the domestic and global distribution, abundance, genesis, and use of these resources to manage 

the Nation’s domestic supplies, anticipate changing patterns 

in use, predict future needs, and secure access to appropriate 

supplies. Unbiased, scientifically sound knowledge describing domestic and international energy and mineral resources, 

therefore, is important to Federal leaders for developing 

policy about commerce, the environment, and national security. Resource managers in DOI and other Federal land and 

resource management agencies need to consider energy and 

mineral resource development in the context of multiple landuse options. State and local agencies and geological surveys, 

foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations, and 

industry use energy and mineral resource information and 

research for their individual needs.

Two issues will dominate the availability of energy and 

mineral resources in the future: the effects of globalization 

and the likelihood that land, water, and environmental changes 

from energy and mineral extraction and consumption will 

factor more strongly into how societies use resources. The 

first issue, globalization, results from modernization and international commerce that have spurred the transport of goods 

among nations. This global economy is increasing the competition 

United States energy consumption by source of fuel since World 

War II. For the past 20 years, consumption of hydrocarbon fuels 

(petroleum, natural gas, and coal) has steadily increased (Energy 

Information Administration, 2005).

1950

0

15

30

45

Quadrillion Btu

Natural Gas

Hydroelectric Power

Nuclear Electric Power

Coal

Petroleum

Biomass

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Energy Resource Use in the United States, 1950-2005

Statement of Strategic Science Direction

Overleaf: U.S. Geological Survey oil endowment in graduated 

green colors superimposed on “Earth at Night” image.
Energy and Minerals for America’s Future 23

for vital natural resources, many of which are only available 

in foreign countries because of unique geological circumstances (see Materials and Mineral Resources for the Future, 

page 24). Developing countries, such as China and India, are 

leading this global competition; China now consumes more 

than it produces of certain major resources, and its demand for 

resources is expected to continue growing. Whereas competition can produce greater availability, it also can drive scarcity, 

market volatility, and higher prices. Vulnerability to scarcity is 

not new; during past times of scarcity, such as the two World 

Wars, the USGS was instrumental in identifying domestic 

sources for many critical war materials when foreign supplies 

were not obtainable. Competition also produces innovation to 

diversify the resource base and find resource substitutions. For 

example, research and development of alternative fuel sources, 

such as coalbed methane, gas hydrates (see Potential Energy 

Resource below), oil shale, agricultural and forestry biofuels 

and others, are diversifying the Nation’s energy mix and 

lessening its dependence on conventional fossil fuels. USGS 

information provides an understanding of the domestic and 

international energy- and mineral-mix pictures and contains 

baseline data about their occurrence and availability. The 

breadth of knowledge in the USGS about the formation and 

extraction of these fundamental energy and mineral building 

blocks is essential for preparing the U.S. Government and 

society for an era of global competition and for ensuring that 

the United States has adequate supplies of energy and mineral 

resources for the well-being of its citizens.

The second issue, environmental effects, is also not new. 

The latter half of the 20th century saw increased awareness of 

Leading Importers of Iron Ore—1980–2003

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Japan Republic of Korea

Germany United States

China

Year

Million metric tons

Explanation

Fire in the ice: Although gas hydrates look 

like ice, they burn if the methane is ignited. 

Photograph by John Pinkston, U.S. Geological 

Survey.

Rapid economic growth in China has resulted in an accelerated 

increase in net imports of iron ore since the mid-1990s (Menzie 

and others, 2004).

Potential Energy Resource

Gas hydrates are unique mixtures of gas (usually methane) and 

water found in the subsurface in permafrost and continental-margin settings. Gas 

hydrates represent an immense potential energy resource and are widely distributed around the globe. Much of the gas hydrate resource in the United States is 

under Federal management. The USGS has been a leader in gas hydrate research 

for more than 20 years, and USGS scientists have led, or collaborated in, major 

national and international drilling field programs in northern Alaska and northern Canada, as well as on the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico coasts of the 

United States and the continental margins of India. The knowledge gained from 

these studies is consistent with a government role to support research in fields with 

great potential public value that are too high-risk, high-cost, and long-term to be 

conducted by the private sector alone. This research lays the foundation to explore 

for, conduct tests on, model production from, and develop the knowledge needed to 

produce gas from gas hydrates. USGS studies also directly contribute to a national 

strategy for research and development of methane hydrates, which includes a 

goal to demonstrate the technical and economic viability of methane recovery 

from arctic hydrates by 2015 and from domestic marine hydrates by 2025. USGS 

gas hydrate studies together with its studies of other geologically based energy 

resources allow USGS to continue providing information on those resources currently (2007) being used, as well as those that may be used in the future.

Gas hydrates are formed worldwide in permafrost and marine continental 

margin settings where appropriate pressures, temperatures, and gas concentrations exist, generally in the uppermost few hundred meters or kilometer below 

the sea floor (marine settings) or near the Earth’s surface (permafrost settings).

environmental contamination (locally, regionally, and globally) 

from, for example, oil spills, mine tailings, dam failure, acid-mine 

drainage, acid rain, clear-cut forest management practice, and 

increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (see following 

Carbon Sequestration and section on Climate Variability and 

Change). The Nation will have to balance the land, water, and 

environmental effects of resource development and extraction 

with the benefits of use, and, perhaps most important, it will have 

to plan for evolving and unanticipated future energy and mineral 

resource requirements within this broader environmental 

perspective of sustainability.
24 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Materials and Mineral Resources for the 

Future

Beginning with the Stone Age and progressing through the 

Bronze Age, the Iron Age, and the modern industrial age, materials 

based on mineral resources have played a central role in advancing 

human civilization. Some minerals have been replaced by stronger 

and more durable substitutes (iron, then steel, for flint); some have 

maintained value over the millennia (gold); some have only come 

into prominence recently as manufacturing transformed the Western 

World (aluminum and titanium). Currently (2007), the 

United States imports a huge 

array of mineral materials, 

including 100 percent of 16 

mineral commodities and 

more than 50 percent of 

an additional 26 mineral 

commodities. Increasing 

demand for new mineral 

materials is not likely to 

diminish in the future. 

Emerging technologies are 

requiring increasing amounts 

of mineral commodities that 

are unequally distributed 

around the world. For 

example, in 2005 the United 

States imported more than 

90 percent of the platinum, 

indium, and rare earth minerals 

required for everyday 

technologies, such as cell 

phones, computers, and 

video monitors. Demand for 

these rare metals is likely to 

increase as new technologies, 

such as advanced batteries and 

fuel cell electronic vehicles, 

are developed. Use of 

mineral materials is undergoing a transition whereby 

science and engineering 

breakthroughs will dominate 

the future—a future in which 

materials will be lighter and 

stronger, last longer, fill 

multiple simultaneous 

functions, cost less per life 

cycle of the material, and be 

environmentally friendly. 

These advances are implemented through material 

substitutions made possible 

by understanding materials 

at the molecular level 

(nanotechnology), combining 

materials in new and pioneering ways (superalloys, 

advanced composites), harnessing new potential from 

traditional and previously 

unused mineral materials 

(powder metallurgy), and mimicking processes found in nature 

(biomimetics). Because there are few suppliers for many of these 

unusual materials, this growing demand can result in high prices 

and the potential for scarcity and market vulnerability. The United 

States can reduce its vulnerability with knowledge and planning.

The USGS must continue to increase fundamental understanding about the origins of these emerging mineral materials 

and reduce uncertainty in mineral resource assessments, so 

that alternative geologic settings for these materials can be 

considered and diverse supply sources encouraged.

2006 U.S. Net Import Reliance for Selected Nonfuel Mineral Materials1

Commodity Percent Major Import Sources (2002-05)

2

China, Morocco, Mexico, Chile

Canada

Jamaica, Guinea, Australia, Brazil

Brazil, Canada, Estonia, Germany

China, Mexico, South Africa, Mongolia

China, Mexico, Canada, Brazil

China, Canada, Japan, Russia

South Africa, Gabon, Australia, China

India, Belgium, China, Brazil

Brazil, Germany, Madagascar, Canada

China, France, Japan, Russia

Canada

Mexico, Germany

Russia, Belgium

France

Czech Republic, Swaziland, Canada, Austria

China, Japan, France, Austria

China, Japan, Ukraine, Russia

Israel, India, Belgium, South Africa

Belgium, Mexico, China, United Kingdom

South Africa, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada

Italy, Turkey, China, Mexico

China, Mexico, Belgium

Chile, Germany

Australia, Canada, China, Japan

China, India

Ireland, Botswana, Ghana, Belgium

Russia, South Africa, United Kingdom, Belgium

Norway, Russia, Finland, Canada

Canada, Belarus, Russia, Germany

Peru, Bolivia, China, Indonesia

South Africa, Kazakhstan, Zimbabwe, Russia

Kazakhstan, Japan, Russia

Chile, Japan

South Africa, Australia, Canada, Ukraine

China, Canada, Germany, Portugal

Mexico, Canada, Peru, Chile

Canada, Mexico, Peru, Australia

Canada, Russia, Norway, Australia

China, Venezuela, Russia, Norway

Canada

Canada, Russia, China, Israel

Australia, India, China, Canada

China, Canada, Australia, Austria

China, Ireland, Ukraine, Russia

Canada, Russia, Venezuela, Brazil

Trinidad and Tobago, Canada, Russia, Ukraine

Chile, Canada, Peru, Mexico

Greece

South Africa, China

Canada, China, India, Finland

Australia, Canada, Belgium, Peru

Canada, Mexico, Spain, Dominican Republic

Canada, Mexico, Venezuela

Canada, Thailand, China, Venezuela

Canada, European Union, Mexico, Brazil

Canada, Chile, The Bahamas, Mexico

Greece, Italy, Turkey

China, Canada, France, Japan

Canada, Italy, France, Japan

Morocco

Canada, Brazil, Chile, Australia

Canada, Australia, China, Mexico

Canada, Mexico

Canada, Mexico, The Bahamas

2

In descending order of import share. 1Source: U.S. Geological Survey (2007).

Arsenic (trioxide) 100

Asbestos 100

Bauxite and alumina 100

Columbium (niobium) 100

Fluorspar 100

Graphite (natural) 100

Indium 100

Manganese 100

Mica, sheet (natural) 100

Quartz crystal (industrial) 100

Rare earths 100

Strontium 100

Rubidium 100

Thallium 100

Thorium 100

Vanadium 100

Yttrium 100

Gallium 99

Gemstones 99

Bismuth 96

Platinum 95

Stone (dimension) 89

Antimony 88

Rhenium 87

Tantalum 87

Barite 83

Diamond (natural industrial stone) 82

Palladium 82

Cobalt 81

Potash 80

Tin 79

Chromium 75

Titanium (sponge) 72

Tungsten 66

Silver 65

Zinc 63

Nickel 60

Silicon (ferrosilicon) 60

Peat 59

Magnesium metal 54

Garnet (industrial) 53

Magnesium compounds 53

Diamond (dust, grit and powder) 51

Aluminum 44

Nitrogen (fixed), ammonia 42

Copper 40

Perlite 35

Vermiculite 31

Mica, scrap and flake (natural) 30

Cadmium 29

Gypsum 27

Sulfur 26

Cement 24

Iron and steel 21

Salt 16

Pumice 12

Talc 11

Iron and steel slag 7

Phosphate rock 6

Iron ore 5

Iodine 71

Titanium mineral concentrates 71

Sand and gravel (construction) 1

Lime 1

Lead 2
Energy and Minerals for America’s Future 25

Carbon Sequestration

Sequestration of carbon dioxide, either geological or in ecosystem soil and biomass, is one strategy for limiting atmospheric accumulation of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion. Globally, the amount of carbon dioxide that must be stored (billions of tons per year) to affect global climate is very large, raising fundamental questions that must be addressed so that stakeholders 

in Federal and State agencies, Congress, the public, and nongovernmental organizations have the information needed to craft sound 

public policy.

Carbon dioxide from point sources can be captured and injected into subsurface geological formations. Injection into depleted 

oil and gas reservoirs, saline aquifer systems, or deep coalbeds has the potential for long-term storage, although uncertainties remain 

concerning leakage and other effects. The basic processes of carbon dioxide injection and storage in the subsurface are currently (2007) 

in practice for enhanced oil recovery and natural gas storage in the United States and elsewhere. Enhancement of these practices is 

central to the work of the international Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) implemented by the United States. As part 

of the CSLF, the USGS is addressing questions of carbon storage capacity and integrity, monitoring and verifying storage amounts, 

geochemical alteration, and displacement of formation water.

Ecosystem carbon sequestration can help restore carbon balance by reestablishing the carbon lost through historical and 

pre-historical land-cover changes. Direct loss of carbon in living plants from forests, woodlands, and grasslands to the atmosphere 

occurred upon conversion to agricultural land. Further agricultural land management resulted in the depletion of the large carbon stocks 

in soil organic matter. Soil organic matter can be built back up, however, with agricultural practices, such as no-till, through conservation programs, and the restoration of degraded lands.

These practices not only have the potential to sequester carbon from the atmosphere through plant carbon fixation and subsequent 

storage but also benefit soils by increasing soil water-holding capacity and fertility and benefit the waterways of the Nation by reducing 

sediment transport. Technical and scientific expertise in remote sensing, ecosystem models and on-the-ground measurements can be 

combined to provide decision-support tools to land and resource managers in the United States and abroad.

the biological, hydrological, and landscape consequences will 

poise the USGS to contribute to informed dialog when policy, 

management, and stewardship issues arise about extraction, use, 

regulation, and waste management. We anticipate four strategic areas that will focus the next decade of energy and mineral 

resource research:

(1) Natural Resource Security for the Future

As the Nation’s energy mix evolves, the USGS needs 

to continue to expand its research and assessment 

portfolio to include a comprehensive suite of energy 

sources, including hydrocarbon-based (for example, 

unconventional gas from coal and shale, gas hydrates, 

oil shale) and nonhydrocarbon-based sources (for 

example, geothermal resources, uranium, agricultural and forestry biofuels, wind). As the energy mix 

diversifies, USGS research directions will change in 

anticipation of, and as a reflection of, national and 

international trends. Research in mineral resources 

increasingly will address evolving requirements for 

rare and scarce materials used in industry and defense. 

Identifying and understanding the source of new and 

substitute mineral materials also will require modifying the portfolio of research priorities. To improve the 

accuracy of assessments, particularly the potential for 

undiscovered resources, a comprehensive understanding of the Earth system in which the resources occur 

is essential. Equally important is building upon and 

maintaining long-term data sets for understanding 

trends in resource provenance, occurrence, and use.

These trends—globalization and environmental impacts—

point to a future in the Nation of a diversified energy mix 

(that is, less dependence on imported oil), changing demands 

for minerals (to support innovative technologies), and a lifecycle approach that links energy and mineral use to the broad 

effects of that use, from exploration and extraction to recycling 

and disposal of waste products. In advancing this energy and 

minerals resource strategic science direction, the USGS builds 

on its traditional strengths of mapping, assessing, modeling, 

forecasting, and conducting fundamental research. USGS longterm databases and information summaries must be continued 

and expanded. But, greater emphasis needs to be placed on 

the environmental consequences of land use, the water cycle, 

ecosystem health, and human welfare. USGS assessments and 

research also must be made integral to public and government 

discourse about the energy and mineral future of the Nation so 

that science can inform, advise, and engage decisionmakers. 

The USGS, with its multidisciplinary scientific expertise in 

hydrology, biology, geology, and geography, is ideally poised 

for moving in these expanded directions.

Strategic Focus

It is inevitable that the United States will move in a direction that diversifies its energy sources to reduce its dependence 

on imports from specific countries and address issues of greenhouse gas emissions. It is equally inevitable that the United 

States will be involved in building new technologies based on 

new mineral and living resource components. As these energy, 

mineral, and living resource requirements evolve, understanding 

not only the geological consequences of these changes, but also 
26 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

(2) Environmental Health

Energy and mineral resources need to be understood in 

a broader context of the comprehensive life-cycle of 

the energy or mineral commodity. Assessments need 

to address the occurrence, formation processes, and 

extraction methods, as well as how the waste products 

of energy and mineral resources influence landscape, 

water, climate, ecosystems, and human health. For 

example, as the use of biofuels expands, what are the 

effects to the Nation’s biota, water, and land, including 

the potential ecological effects of genetically modified plant species, current and expected future changes 

in water quality and quantity from biofuels production, and how does returning currently fallow lands to 

agricultural or forestry production affect water quality, 

native plants, migratory birds, and wildlife? When new 

commodities are used or modified and released in the 

environment (for example, as nanoparticles), what are 

the effects on ecosystems and human health? Perhaps 

the greatest research need is to integrate assessments of 

fossil energy resources with the consequences of using 

the fuel—increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels 

and climate change. There is a critical need for research 

on the carbon cycle and on carbon sequestration in 

geological and in biological reservoirs.

(3) Economic Vitality of the Nation

Research within the USGS can contribute to the 

American Competitiveness Initiative by identifying, 

studying, and understanding potential new energy 

and mineral commodities. This research can provide 

opportunities for USGS to partner with other agencies 

or industry in the use of this knowledge to facilitate 

development of new industries and guide government 

decisions about the government role in promoting new 

industries. USGS gas hydrate research (see Potential 

Energy Resource) is an example where partnering 

with industry has created opportunities for access 

to drilling information that otherwise would be too 

expensive to support independently. Management of 

the carbon cycle is another example of a field where 

new industries are likely to develop; although the 

goals of carbon cycle management are controversial, 

USGS can contribute objective knowledge to inform 

the discourse about the realities of geological and 

biological carbon sequestration that will be useful 

regardless of the final policy goals. The USGS has 

detailed knowledge, unmatched by any other Federal 

agency, of both nature of the crust of the Nation and 

fluid migration within it. This knowledge is necessary to help guide implementation of geologic carbon 

sequestration from fixed sources, such as coal-fired 

power plants. Two examples of USGS research that 

will fill key gaps in carbon-cycle knowledge are the 

baseline data contained in a national soil geochemical 

map and data compilations from models of carbon 

dynamics in vegetation and soil effected by soil erosion/deposition. 

Economic resource valuation has been a component of 

USGS hydrocarbon assessments, and is increasingly 

an element of mineral assessments, as well. This 

economic perspective will be expanded over the next 

decade to encompass the full life cycle of energy and 

mineral resource commodities. Although economic 

research is not a primary purpose of USGS research, 

achieving natural resource security and sustainability 

requires that science be used in a broader societal 

context, in which economic and sociological factors 

are considered. Partnerships and collaboration in the 

next decade clearly are important in moving USGS 

forward on this front.

(4) Management of DOI, Federal, and 

Other Lands

Future decisions about the use of energy and mineral 

resources on Federal lands will need to accommodate ecosystem-based management practices. U.S. 

Federal onshore lands, many of which are managed 

within DOI, will need to accommodate ecosystembased management practices as they face competing 

demands for recreation, transport, leasing, conservation, and economic growth. USGS monitoring, assessment, and research must be relevant to managers who 

require decisions informed by science. Offshore Federal lands, which encompass the continental margin 

Unprocessed, nonfuel mineral materials put into use annually in 

the United States from 1900–2003 (after Matos, 2007).

Mineral Resource Use in the United States

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2003

Primary metals

Recycled metals

Industrial minerals

Natural aggregates

World War I

World War II

Great Depression

Oil crisis

Recessions

Explanation

Year

Million metric tons
Energy and Minerals for America’s Future 27

Environment

Deposit

Formation

Commodity Use

Disposal Recycling

Erosion Mining,

Processing,

Refining

Genetic

models

Geoenvironmental

deposit models

Minerals information,

analysis, materials flow

cesses, and provide the knowledge base that integrates 

adaptive ecosystem-based management with energy and 

mineral policy on Federal lands, allowing managers to 

consider energy and mineral development in the context 

of multiple land-use options.

• Develop scientific methods for monitoring and assessing biological and geological carbon sequestration 

resources, including assessment of interdependencies 

among land, water, and ecosystem resources that may be 

affected by carbon management decisions.

• Continue to improve and expand geologic, biologic, and 

hydrologic understanding of assessment methodology 

for alternative energy resources as the Nation moves to 

a more diversified energy mix (such as coalbed methane, oil shale, tight gas sands, shale gas, gas hydrates, 

geothermal energy, uranium, and biofuels).

• Anticipate, identify, and develop understanding of the 

occurrence, genesis, and risks associated with using new 

mineral resources.

• Improve scientific understanding of the origin and occurrence of energy and mineral resource deposits, and use 

this knowledge to improve the accuracy and reduce the 

uncertainty of resource assessments.

Materials Flow

Materials flow, in its most literal sense, is a systems approach to understanding what happens to the materials people use from the time a material is extracted, through 

its processing and manufacturing, to its ultimate disposition. 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) investigates the life 

cycle of materials, trends in material use, as well as how 

materials affect the economy, society, and the environment. 

The purpose of this work is to understand how and why we 

use the resources and to identify policies and practices that 

make resource use more efficient and more protective of the 

environment. Some materials-flow studies identify and trace 

trends that, if they continue, could have worldwide economic 

and environmental effects. For example, a current important 

trend is the declining share of renewable resources, such as 

agricultural and forestry products (for example, cotton and 

wood), and the increasing share of nonrenewable resources, 

especially construction materials, in overall nonfood, nonfuel material consumption. Another type of materials-flow 

analysis is the commodity mass balance study, which follows 

and quantifies the flow of a single commodity through its 

entire life cycle. Studies have been completed on arsenic, 

boron, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, salt, tungsten, vanadium, and zinc. Commodity-mass 

balance analyses identify areas where adverse effects could 

be minimized by reducing waste at the source of the materials, improving the use of waste (recycling), and enhancing 

efficiencies. Opportunities exist for using this approach in the 

energy sector.

Life cycle of mineralized systems: Life-cycle analysis 

of mineralized systems demonstrates how minerals are 

made available to sustain societies through natural and 

anthropogenic processes. USGS scientific activities address 

the entire minerals life cycle.

between state limits (generally 3 nautical miles) and 

200 nautical miles or beyond, will be under increasing 

pressure to be opened to mineral mining. Although 

such mining is currently (2007) marginally viable, it is 

expected to mature in the next 10 to 20 years; USGS 

research in understanding marine mineral genesis and 

distribution will complement DOI leasing and regulatory responsibilities. If the United Nations Convention 

on the Law of the Sea is ratified by the U.S. Congress, 

USGS has an important role to play in extending the 

juridical Continental Shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, 

particularly in the Arctic, Atlantic margin, and some 

of the Pacific island territories.

Strategic Actions

• Develop a multidisciplinary approach to energy and mineral assessments that includes comprehensive accounting of life cycle and environmental (land, water, and 

ecosystem) effects of energy and mineral exploration, 

extraction, and use. Refine methodologies for doing this 

approach quantitatively and in economic terms.

• Develop procedures to evaluate and understand effects of 

energy and mineral resource use on ecosystem pro-
28 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

• Maintain and update the geological and geophysical 

databases and geochemical baselines used to develop 

national and global resource assessments. Ensure the 

data are accessible both internally and externally.

• Continue to produce, update, and improve national and 

global energy and mineral assessments.

• Make USGS assessments and research integral to public 

and government discourse about the energy and mineral 

future of the Nation so that science can inform, advise, 

and engage decisionmakers.

Vision of 2017

The USGS energy and mineral information and national 

and global resource assessments remain the standard used by 

industry and government. Recognizing the broad economic, 

environmental, and societal consequences of extraction and use, 

USGS scientists have continuously enhanced their understanding of the genesis of energy and mineral resources and routinely 

include environmental and life-cycle expertise into studies and 

assessments. The quantified effects of resource development, 

use, and recycling on ecosystems, landscapes, hydrology, climate, 

and human health are an essential part of USGS studies and 

assessments. Working across and among disciplines, USGS 

science provides the knowledge base that facilitates integration 

of adaptive ecosystem management with energy- and mineralresource policies on Federal and other lands, as well as providing 

this information for a larger domestic and international audience. 

Assessments of previously unexploited mineral and energy 

resources (for example, gas hydrates, uranium, rare-earth metals), 

including renewable resources, such as agricultural and forestry 

biofuels, keep pace with evolving geologic and biologic understanding and technological developments. Geochemical-baseline 

soil maps and ecosystem maps of the Nation are completed and 

updated. Thus, the energy and mineral strategic science of the 

USGS includes ecologic, hydrologic, and climate studies in 

addition to traditional geologic research and assessment.

Gold-mining operation at the Martha mine in the Waihi mining district, New Zealand. The USGS supports research and assessments 

of minerals, as well as collection of minerals information on a global scale. Photograph by Robert S. Seal, U.S. Geological Survey.
A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment 

Program: 

Background

The Nation faces increasing losses from natural hazards, 

threatening safety, security, economic well-being, and natural 

resources. Governments at all levels are faced with difficult 

decisions, balancing growth and development while ensuring 

the safety of their communities. The USGS is an international 

leader in natural hazards research, monitoring, assessing, and 

communicating timely information about hazards. A strength 

of the USGS is also working with partners to monitor and 

assess urban and environmental vulnerability and to provide 

leaders with the information they need to make effective decisions on natural hazards issues.

Ensuring the Long-Term Health and Wealth of the Nation

29
30 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

As Hurricane Katrina, the eruptions of Mount St. Helens, 

the Northridge earthquake, and western wildfires demonstrate, 

natural hazards are important and continuing threats to the 

Nation’s safety, security, economic well-being, and natural 

resources. Although sudden extreme events, such as hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, flash floods, wildfires, volcanoes, and landslides, capture the public’s attention, equally 

threatening are the effects of slower, more chronic hazards 

related to climate change, such as drought and ecosystem 

collapse. The risks from natural hazards are a function not 

only of the hazards themselves but also of development patterns and decisions made before, during, and after an extreme 

event. Much of the Nation’s infrastructure and building stock 

are aging, making them more vulnerable to natural hazards. 

Expanding urbanization of hazard-prone areas, such as coastal 

zones, hillsides, floodplains, and wildland-urban interfaces, 

heightens the risk of future disasters. With disaster-relief costs 

mounting and private companies increasingly challenged in 

their ability to recover from catastrophic losses related to 

disasters, the Nation needs a clear understanding of potential 

threats, the societal vulnerability to these threats, and the 

strategies for increasing resilience. Working with partners, 

the USGS will build this understanding through a national 

assessment of hazards, societal risks, and vulnerabilities in 

order to provide managers and policymakers at all levels of 

government with the tools they need to make better and more 

cost-effective decisions.

The need for action is urgent. Although until recently the 

number of lives lost to natural hazards in the United States 

each year has declined, the economic cost of response to, and 

recovery from, major disasters continues to rise. Each decade, 

the cost in constant dollars of property damage from natural 

hazards doubles or triples. If current trends continue, by 2017 

the Nation will face increasing numbers of intense hurricanes making landfall, increasing drought, more destructive 

wildfires, and expansion of population into coastal and other 

high-hazard regions of the country. With societal risk and 

vulnerability to natural hazards rising, governments will be 

faced with difficult decisions, balancing growth and development with ensuring the resilience and sustainability of their 

communities. Leaders must make decisions about increasingly 

complex technical issues, and the information they require 

contains many uncertainties. How they deal with these issues, 

how they allocate resources, and how urban areas grow will 

all determine the Nation’s standard of living and ability to 

compete in a global economy.

The USGS has statutory and mission responsibilities 

for using the best science available to help policymakers, 

emergency managers, and citizens respond to natural hazards 

and plan for a safer, more resilient society. USGS has the 

lead Federal responsibility under the Disaster Relief Act 

(P.L. 93-288, popularly known as the Stafford Act) to issue 

alerts for earthquakes, volcanoes, and landslides to enhance 

public safety and to reduce losses through effective forecasts 

and warnings. The USGS is already recognized nationally 

and internationally as a primary source for research and 

information on the causes, occurrence, and consequences of 

natural hazards.

Other agencies rely on USGS information to help them 

fulfill their responsibilities regarding natural hazards. USGS 

real-time streamflow information is essential to the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National 

Weather Service (NWS) for developing its forecasts and carrying out its statutory responsibility to issue flood watches and 

warnings. The NWS also relies on data from USGS-supported 

seismic networks as a key input for tsunami warnings. USGS 

seismic-hazard maps provide information used to develop 

building codes across the United States. USGS coastal-change 

vulnerability products provide pre-hurricane forecasts of 

impacts on infrastructure, essential for evacuation and poststorm recovery efforts. USGS and its Federal partners monitor 

seasonal wildland fire danger conditions, provide research 

on effectiveness of postfire recovery strategies for reducing debris flows and fire frequency, and provide firefighters 

with maps of current fire locations, perimeters, and potential 

spread. A major focus of work by the USGS and partners will 

be the development of robust models for prediction of when 

and where rainfall- and earthquake-triggered debris-flows are 

likely to occur. The USGS partners with the Federal Aviation 

Administration, NOAA, and others to help pilots avoid dangerous volcanic ash clouds. To mitigate the hazardous effects 

of geomagnetic storms on the activities and infrastructure of 

today’s technologically based society, the USGS works cooperatively under the auspices of the National Space Weather 

Program with NOAA, the U.S. Department of Defense, the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and 

the National Science Foundation (NSF), providing real-time 

The USGS collects accurate and timely information from modern earth observation networks, assesses areas 

at risk from natural hazards, and conducts focused research to improve hazard predictions. In addition, the USGS works actively with the Nation’s communities to assess the vulnerability of cities 

and ecosystems and to ensure that science is effectively applied to reduce losses. The USGS will 

develop a national risk-monitoring program, built on a robust underpinning of hazard assessment 

and research, to visualize and provide perspectives at multiple scales of vulnerability and resilience 

to adverse land change and hazards. Accurate observations, targeted research, and timely communications will safeguard people and property and keep natural hazards from becoming natural disasters.

Statement of Strategic Science Direction
A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program 31

ground-based magnetometer data for monitoring the changing 

conditions of the Earth’s space environment. These achievements are all possible because the USGS is able to bring a 

unique combination of disciplines—biology, geology, hydrology, geography, and geospatial information technology—to 

bear on all these hazards.

Decisions about natural hazards are linked in complex 

ways with decisions on land use, human health, and natural 

resources. The USGS is unique in having expertise and ongoing collaborations in all of these fields. We must continue to 

monitor, predict, assess, and issue warnings of natural hazards. 

In addition, we must increase efforts to communicate how the 

Nation is at risk from these hazards and what makes communities more resilient to extreme events and ongoing changes in 

the environment. By developing a new generation of riskfocused products, including scenarios of damage from likely 

events, USGS and its partners can help make hazards real to 

communities and help them understand their vulnerability to 

the forces of nature.

washed away sand beaches, creating submerged sandbars and 

leaving remaining areas of marsh vulnerable to further erosion. 

Major parts of the Chandeleur barrier island beaches and dunes 

were completely eroded (see following photograph), reducing 

their function as a protective barrier for the eastern Mississippi 

delta and its settlements. Large areas of nesting grounds for 

endangered brown pelicans and other birds were essentially 

eliminated. The land loss also threatens the use of the islands 

by neotropical birds en route to and from Central America as 

a major stopover point. Damage was also extensive offshore, 

where nearly half of the offshore sea-grass beds were damaged 

with negative effects to the marine mammals, turtles, fish, and 

ducks that rely on them for their survival. Knowledge about this 

land loss and associated processes is being used to further refine 

predictive models of coastal impacts from severe storms. The 

USGS collects and interprets data in collaboration with NASA, 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the University of New 

Orleans. The data are available to local, State, and Federal agencies for use in disaster recovery and erosion mitigation.

Hurricane Katrina: Addressing the Need to 

Assess Coastal Change Hazards

Hurricane Katrina made landfall as a Category 4 storm in 

Plaquemines Parish, La., on August 29, 2005, and altered the 

physical, ecological, social, and economic structure of the city 

of New Orleans and the entire Gulf of Mexico coastal zone in 

ways that will have enormous long-term effects. USGS studies comparing before and after satellite imagery, georeferenced 

video and still photography, and laser altimetry have been used 

to map the extent of flooding and associated volume of water 

as well as to show that the land loss of wetlands, marshes, and 

beaches along the coast was enormous. With a storm surge 

east of New Orleans and along the Mississippi coast of 25 to 

30 feet, some wetland areas lost 25 percent of their land area. 

The before and after images demonstrate how, in many places, 

high winds, heavy waves, and powerful storm surge picked up 

tons of sand and silt and pushed them far inland, filling navigation canals, inundating buildings, and burying roadways and 

railway tracks. In other areas, the storm devastated wetlands and 
32 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Strategic Focus

A core element of the USGS mission is to provide scientific information in order to minimize loss of life and damage to 

property from natural disasters. The USGS monitors, integrates, 

analyzes, and delivers a broad spectrum of natural-science 

information that enables community leaders to make key decisions on the allocation of resources. These capabilities include 

assessments of solid earth, hydrological, and biological hazards 

affecting both ecosystems and the built environment. The USGS 

leads the Nation in effectively harnessing advances in Geospatial 

Information Systems (GIS), Internet, and information technologies to develop objective decision-support tools. But to truly 

manage and reduce risk from natural hazards, the USGS must 

augment its strengths with partnerships that reduce societal 

vulnerability, increase community resilience, and engage and 

inform decisionmakers at all levels. There are five areas where 

the USGS must focus its hazard efforts in the next decade:

(1) Robust Monitoring Infrastructure: To reach the 10-year 

vision described here, major foundational investments in robust 

monitoring networks are necessary for accurate predictions and 

characterizations of hazards, as well as information critical to 

response and recovery efforts. Modernization of earthquake, volcano, and flood-monitoring networks, in particular, is essential to 

help communities prepare for, respond to, and recover from natural hazard events. The need for modernization of these networks 

was identified as a high priority by the recently released National 

Science and Technology Council report on Improved Observations 

for Disaster Reduction: Near-Term Opportunity Plan (U.S. Group 

on Earth Observations/Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction, 

2006) to implement the Strategic Plan for the U.S. Integrated Earth 

Observation System (National Science and Technology Council, 

2005). The main USGS investments needed are as follows:

• Full deployment of the Advanced National Seismic 

System to improve seismic monitoring of the Nation and 

the 26 U.S. urban areas at greatest risk from earthquakes

• Development and deployment of the National Volcano 

Early Warning System to monitor the Nation’s 169 

volcanoes commensurate with the threats they pose

• Deployment of a stable, core network of USGS-supported 

streamgages through the National Streamflow Information Program (NSIP) for continuity of data critical for 

flood warnings, floodplain planning, and other uses

• Expansion of the Marsh Surface Elevation Table 

Network to evaluate the effects of sea-level rise and 

hurricanes on coastal wetlands

• Access to advanced technology, such as Light Detection 

and Ranging (LIDAR), to assess and monitor hazardsrelated landscape changes, particularly coastal change

The Global Seismographic Network provides rapid information about earthquakes around the world; it is just one example of the USGS 

commitment to using its human and technological resources to respond to disasters globally. In recent years, the bureau has partnered 

with the U.S. Agency for the International Development Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance to respond to volcanic eruptions in 

Mexico, Ecuador, and the Philippines, landslides and floods in Central America, and earthquakes and tsunamis in Asia and the Indian 

Ocean, and many other natural disasters. These responses commonly have the goal of infrastructure development, technology transfer, 

and training in monitoring and hazard assessment.

Global Seismographic Network

AAK

ABKT

ADK

AFI

ALE

ANMO

ANTO

ARU

ASCN

BBSR

BDFB

BFO

BGCA

BILL

BJT

BORG

BOSA

BRVK

BTDF

CASY

CCM

CHTO

CMB CMLA

COCO

COLA

COR

CPUP

CTAO

DAV DBIC

DGAR

DPC

DWPF

EFI

ENH

ERM

FFC ESK

FUNA

FURI

GNI

GRFO

GUMO

H2O

HIA

HKT

HNR

HOPE

HRV INCN

JOHN

JTS

KAPI

KBS

KDAK

KEV

KIEV

KIP

KIV

KMBO

KMI

KONO

KOWA

KURK

KWAJ

LBTB

LCO

LPAZ

LSA

LSZ

LVC

LVZ

MA2

MAJO

MAKZ

MBAR

MBWA

MDJ

MIDW

MSKU MSEY

MSVF

NIL

NNA

NRIL

NWAO

OBN

OTAV

PAB

PALK

PAS

PAYG

PET

PFO

PLCA

PMG

PMSA

POHA

PTCN

PTGA

QIZ

QSPA

RAO

RAR

RAYN

RCBR

RPN

RSSD

SACV

SAML

SBA

SDV

SFJD

SHEL

SJG

SNZO

SSE

SSPA

SUR

TATO

TAU

TEIG

TIXI

TLY

TRIS TRQA

TSUM

TUC

ULN

VNDA

WAKE

WCI

WMQ

WRAB

WVT XAN

XMAS

YAK

YSS

ABPO

KANT

SLBS UAE

TARA

MACI

Installed Planned

86 3 IRIS/USGS Stations

39 2 IRIS/IDA Stations

5 4 USGS/CU Stations

14 Other/Affiliated GSN Stations

USGS Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory

April 1, 2007

Explanation
A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program 33

(2) Technology for Network Communications: During 

the next decade, the USGS should take advantage of new and 

emerging technologies for network communications and rapid 

and useful communications of hazards information. One new 

communication tool in the earthquake realm is PAGER (Prompt 

Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response). This system, 

which uses the Global Seismographic Network, will provide 

information to help emergency relief organizations, government 

agencies, and the media respond effectively to earthquake disasters worldwide. PAGER will distribute alarms by way of pager, 

mobile phone, and e-mail that will include a concise estimate 

of impact, in addition to the earthquake location, magnitude, 

and depth as currently reported. That estimate will include the 

likely number of people exposed to varying levels of shaking, 

a description of the fragility of the region’s building stock and 

infrastructure, and a measure of confidence in the system’s 

impact assessment. Associated maps of shaking level, population density, and susceptibility to landslides will be posted on 

the Internet within minutes of the determination of the earthquake location and magnitude.

(3) Characterizing and Assessing Hazards: Assessing 

where hazards are likely to occur and how large they are likely 

to be is essential for making decisions about where to live 

and build infrastructure. The USGS already provides national 

seismic-hazard maps that are the model for national assessments 

worldwide. The USGS has also begun creating urban hazard 

maps for earthquakes and landslides, taking local conditions 

into account. By 2017, the USGS will have developed the 

necessary methodologies and procedures and partnered with 

local groups to substantially expand urban hazard mapping 

throughout the Nation. The USGS should further add value 

and usefulness to hazard assessment by partnering to evaluate the physical and socioeconomic vulnerability of the built 

and natural environment to multiple hazards. Over the next 

decade, examples of improved hazard assessment in the USGS 

should include enhancement of LANDFIRE—an interagency 

cooperative assessment of wildfire factors—to project changes 

in vegetation, fire fuels, and fire characteristics over time; 

development of streamflow characteristics for all locations in 

the Nation, including areas without streamgages; assessment 

of vulnerability of hurricane-threatened U.S. coasts to different 

hurricane types and intensities; and determination of potential 

for tsunami generation in U.S. offshore waters. Assessments of 

the vulnerability of national parks and wildlife refuges along the 

Nation’s coasts to sea-level rise and coastal change should be 

expanded and updated.

(4) Forecasts Based on Understanding Physical Processes: 

Accurate forecasts and predictions depend on a thorough 

understanding of the physical processes controlling a hazard’s 

occurrence, distribution, timing, and severity, as well as the 

effects of hazards on the landscape, the built environment, and 

human health. Much targeted research already occurs within 

the USGS and within external research institutions supported 

by USGS programs; over the next decade, these efforts must 

be expanded to reduce uncertainties and improve understanding even further. A few examples: Over the next decade, use of 

paleorecords (also called proxy records in climate and storm 

research) will improve understanding of long-term trends and 

improve probabilistic assessments of many hazards. Progress 

will be made in producing time-dependent earthquake hazard 

A wildfire left very little of this home near San Bernadino, California, in October 2003. FEMA photograph by Kevin Galvin.
34 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

maps that take into account the changing state of faults and their 

surroundings and are also an important step toward the elusive 

goal of understanding earthquake predictability. For volcanoes, 

research will move the USGS toward an ability to forecast not 

just the timing of eruptions but their style and magnitude as 

well. A better understanding of landslide processes will form 

the basis for real-time landslide and debris flow warning systems. Research on tsunami-generating processes will improve 

assessments of tsunami hazard potential on the Nation’s coasts 

and worldwide. Promising advances in noncontact data collection and real-time estimates of measurement uncertainty 

will substantially improve flood estimates. The USGS will act 

in alignment with the U.S. Ocean Research Priorities Plan to 

forecast the response of coastal landscapes and ecosystems to 

extreme events. A greater understanding of wetland and coastal 

processes will be essential to ameliorate the effects of sea-level 

rise and hurricanes, like those of 2005, on coastal communities, 

landscapes, and ecosystems.

(5) Partnerships: By 2017, the USGS will be working 

with partners in universities and other governmental agencies 

to monitor the changing vulnerability of our cities and 

ecosystems due to socioeconomic trends, land-use changes, 

ecosystem loss, and climate change. We will have developed 

a national toolbox of societal vulnerability and resilience 

indicators that, in conjunction with the products generated from 

monitoring, will allow the USGS to work with communities 

and the private sector to better understand the risks they 

face. And we will have the models, metrics, decision-support 

tools, and portals that provide intelligent access to remotely 

sensed data and geospatial information for cost-effective 

risk-reduction, response, and recovery efforts. Communicating 

and furthering understanding about societal vulnerability 

will require a multidisciplinary approach, and a coordinated 

hazard and risk program provides a mechanism to integrate the 

hazard, land cover, climate change, and risk and vulnerability 

expertise at the USGS and its partners. In addition to enhanced 

Invasive grass species, which propagate easily after fires, have changed the fire regime to one of more frequent fires that threaten the survival 

of Joshua trees. USGS research on this fire/invasive species cycle is helping DOI land managers to preserve the Joshua tree forest ecosystem.

as the present population of 20 million grows at more than 10 

percent per year. The project will focus on those natural hazards 

posing a significant threat to life and property in southern 

California—earthquakes, floods, landslides, tsunamis, and 

wildfires—and will build on work already underway in the 

study area. Reducing these future losses requires the commitment and involvement of the southern California community 

together with the best information about hazard, risk, and costeffectiveness of mitigation technologies. Long-term sustainable 

solutions require broad perspectives that recognize the interconnectedness of urban and natural resources. Thus, the USGS will 

develop a public/private partnership where local partners and 

other government collaborators in southern California work 

together to develop and apply the best research to reduce 

community vulnerability to natural hazards.

Multihazards Demonstration Project in 

Southern California

The USGS has recognized the urgency of hazards issues 

and over the past several years has invested substantial time and 

energy building a hazards initiative. One result of these efforts 

is a demonstration project for multihazards science, a new 

collaboration in southern California to reduce vulnerability to 

natural hazards through the application of science and engineering 

to community planning and response. Southern California has one 

of the Nation’s highest potentials for extreme, catastrophic 

losses from a number of natural hazards. Estimates of expected 

losses from natural hazards in the eight counties of southern 

California exceed $3 billion per year and are expected to increase 
A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program 35

other linked science thrusts of the USGS, including 

land use and cover, climate change, wildfire, 

ecosystems, zoonotic diseases, and coastal and 

marine geology and ecology.

• Develop a core of USGS and partner researchers 

focusing on vulnerability science, colocated with 

USGS hazard program science centers, external 

agencies, universities and Federal partners. This 

group will: (a) develop local, regional, and national 

indicators and visualization tools to understand and 

communicate societal vulnerability and resilience to 

natural hazards; and (b) conduct case studies to assess 

vulnerability and resilience of communities, ecosystems, and economies to specific natural hazards. 

Build and strengthen ties to existing governmental, 

private-sector, and academic groups that focus on 

risk assessment and management, as well as disaster 

response and recovery.

• Develop a national risk-monitoring program, built 

on a robust underpinning of hazard assessment and 

research that visualizes and provides perspectives 

at multiple scales of vulnerability and resilience to 

adverse land change and hazards.

• Create a bureau-wide disaster assistance strategy for 

providing scientific and technical support for hazard 

assessment, scenario development, disaster preparedness, and response and recovery efforts.

• Develop communication strategies and decision-support 

products that focus on understanding societal risk 

and resilience to natural hazards, and develop new 

individualized ways of communicating hazards and 

hazard assessments to local audiences and to targeted 

audiences with different needs.

Too much water peaks our curiosity at times, like during this 

March 2002 flood on the Levisa Fork in eastern Kentucky. 

Photograph by Steve Pickard, U.S. Geological Survey.

hazards research on the causes and effects of natural hazards, 

future research should identify how land-use and land-cover 

changes, climate change, new energy sources, and other factors 

create or amplify hazards and vulnerabilities of human and 

environmental systems. A national vulnerability-monitoring 

program would integrate land cover, land use, population and 

demographic patterns, economic distributions, and hazards 

information to identify at-risk areas. Geographic methods and 

tools need to be developed and applied to assess the effectiveness 

of mitigation, alternative land-use strategies, risk communication 

approaches, and other risk management scenarios, as well as 

provide intelligent access to data, knowledge, and predictive 

models for response and recovery efforts. The effective integration 

of natural sciences and social science will result in a greatly 

improved ability to assess the potential risks posed by natural 

hazards, to mitigate potential impacts, and to respond and 

recover efficiently when extreme natural events occur.

By building in these five strategic directions, USGS will 

contribute to effective risk reduction. Monitoring and communications tools will improve real-time forecasting and reporting 

of the locations and likely impacts of events. National, regional, 

and local assessments of hazards and risk will result in smaller 

uncertainty and greater accuracy; the fundamental research 

to understand the causes and effects of hazards and to predict 

their occurrence will contribute to more accurate warnings and 

greater preservation of life and property. Improved monitoring, 

mapping, and fundamental research also will lead to reduction 

in the uncertainties associated with loss-estimation models, 

which translate to cost-effective mitigation strategies and potentially decrease the cost of insurance and reinsurance. The USGS 

must augment all of these abilities over the next 10 years.

Strategic Actions

• Expand and modernize USGS monitoring and communications capabilities to take full advantage of 

technology advances in order to deliver robust and 

reliable products.

• Increase research into the causes and consequences 

of coastal erosion, earthquakes, floods, geomagnetic 

storms, landslides, tsunamis, volcanoes, wildfires, 

and zoonotic diseases.

• Enhance understanding of the linkages among 

natural hazards, the environment, climate, and 

society, and the ways by which climate variability 

and change influence the frequency and intensity of 

natural-hazard events.

• Develop models with robust predictive capability to 

support land and emergency managers in short- and 

long-term hazard mitigation decisionmaking.

• Form an intrabureau hazards working group of scientists from the existing hazards programs and from 
36 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

• Expanded real-time monitoring to include the most 

threatening of the Nation’s volcanoes

• A 24/7 Volcano Watch Office that takes full advantage 

of real-time monitoring networks and improves delivery of hazard information to key users

• A National Volcano Data Center that provides highquality data sets for volcanic-hazards analysis and 

research

• An external grants program to enhance research collaboration between Federal and academic scientists

• More than a network of instruments, NVEWS connects the monitoring and research efforts of scientists 

to the emergency managers and general public at both 

national and local levels to minimize the impact of 

volcanic activity on the Nation.

Vision of 2017

In 2017, the Nation is safer from natural disasters, thanks 

to a seamless, integrated disaster reduction/monitoring/warning system maintained and operated by the USGS and its partners. Interdisciplinary research into the earth-system processes 

that drive hazards has led to decision-support systems and 

models that communities at risk use to make better decisions 

and safeguard people and property. A network of monitoring 

stations across the United States provides timely and reliable 

information on stream levels, volcanic and earthquake activity, wildlife diseases that may affect human health, and other 

potential hazards. The changing vulnerability of our cities and 

ecosystems owing to socioeconomic trends, land-use changes, 

ecosystem loss, and climate change also is monitored. Healthy 

forest, grassland, and wetland ecosystems prevent natural 

events like extreme rainfall or lightning strikes from turning 

into catastrophic floods or fires. Improved communications 

technology ensures that communities have enough warning to 

respond to the natural hazards they face.

NVEWS aims to reduce vulnerability to volcanic hazards by providing:

This house in Kalapana, Hawaii, is burned by approaching 

lava from Kilauea Volcano on Sunday, April 22, 1990. Most of 

Kalapana was destroyed by lava flows between 1986 and 1990, 

with 180 homes lost. Photograph by U.S. Geological Survey.

Mount St. Helens photograph by U.S. Geological Survey.

The National Volcano Early Warning 

System (NVEWS)

To reduce community vulnerability on the ground and 

in the air, the USGS National Volcano Early Warning System 

will monitor the Nation’s 169 active volcanoes at levels appropriate to the threats posed. Roughly half of U.S. volcanoes are 

dangerous because of the manner in which they erupt and the 

communities and infrastructure within their destructive reach. 

It is the threat to communities and infrastructure downstream 

and downwind, including to military and commercial aviation, 

that drives the need to properly monitor volcanic activity and 

provide forecasts and notifications of expected hazards.

A systematic assessment of volcanic threat and current 

monitoring capabilities has identified 57 priority volcanoes 

that are undermonitored and thus targets for improved monitoring networks.
A National Hazards, Risk, and Resilience Assessment Program 37

Real-time Information for Safer 

Communities

Dry Normal Wet

Choose a data retrieval option and select a location on the map

List of all stations in state, State map, or Nearest stations

Explanation - Percentile classes

New low < 10 10 - 24 25-74 75 - 89 ≥90 New high

Map of real-time streamflow compared to historical streamflow

for the day of the year (United States)

Tuesday, December 10, 2002 08:01 ET

Streamflow Information on Tap

Since 1887, the USGS has operated a streamgaging program to collect information needed by Federal, 

State, and local agencies for water-related planning, 

management, and regulatory programs and for flood 

warning and emergency management. Management 

strategies that make optimum use of the Nation’s existing water resources or that keep people out of harm’s 

way require more information in greater detail and in 

more constrained timeframes than was needed in the 

past. The National Weather Service uses real-time data 

from about 4,000 of the approximately 7,000 USGS 

streamgages to forecast flow conditions on major 

U.S. rivers and small streams in urban areas. In fact, 

the most profound change in the USGS streamgaging 

program in recent years has been the development and 

widespread use of real-time streamflow data by many 

partners and the public.

Water Watch is the official USGS website for real-time streamflow 

conditions nationwide in relation to historical conditions (http://water.

usgs.gov/waterwatch). It also connects the user directly to NWIS-Web, 

the USGS online National Water Information System that provides 

access to real-time and historical surface-water, ground-water, and 

water-quality data at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/.

A ShakeMap of a magnitude 6.7 earthquake near Northridge, 

California, 1994. Simplified versions are quickly available for the 

news media.

ShakeMaps in Minutes

The USGS is the only agency in the United States 

responsible for the routine monitoring and notification of 

earthquakes. The USGS fulfills this role through a national 

backbone network and support for 14 regional networks in 

areas of moderate to high seismic activity, integrated to form 

the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). The revolution in information technology has enabled ANSS to achieve 

dramatic advances in real-time seismic data analysis and rapid 

earthquake notification. In urban areas, where dense arrays of 

sensors have been deployed, data from those sensors are used 

to produce, within a few minutes of the earthquake, a map 

showing the actual severity and distribution of strong ground 

shaking caused by an earthquake. Emergency management 

officials and others use these “ShakeMaps” to direct emergency response to the earthquake at a time when communications from heavily damaged areas may be unreliable. Some 

form of sensor-based ShakeMap capability now exists for Los 

Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Anchorage, and Salt Lake 

City. With additional support, this capability can be deployed 

in all large urban areas with high seismic risk. The success of 

ShakeMaps depends on adequate ANSS instrumentation and 

effective USGS partnerships with the user community.

The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health: 

A System that Identifies Environmental Risk to Public Health in America

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2006) define 

emerging infectious diseases and environmental threats as 

health and safety challenges of the 21st century. Understanding environmental and ecological health clearly is essential for 

protecting the public health of the Nation and the world. 

The current (2007) health problems caused by zoonotic 

diseases (that is, those transmissible between animals and 

humans, such as West Nile virus and avian influenza) and environmental contamination (for example, mercury in fish, arsenic 

in water, naturally present asbestos) are not isolated examples. 

Future generations will continue to be affected by many of the 

diseases that have emerged or resurged during the past quartercentury, regardless of whether the causes are chemical, microbial, or parasitic. Dealing with emerging and resurging diseases 

requires the ability to anticipate potential environmental and 

ecosystem health threats, recognize pathogens or contaminants 

when they first appear, and respond quickly and appropriately. 

Because many zoonotic disease outbreaks are evident in wild 

animal populations before they affect people, wildlife health and 

disease monitoring serves as an indicator of environmental and 

ecosystem health and is thus essential to any information system 

for protecting human health.

Environmentally related diseases inevitably will increase 

as the isolation previously provided by walls of geographic 

distance are removed and the opportunity for the spread of 

once-isolated diseases increases. Public health risks will further intensify as population growth continues, bringing with it 

associated pressures of development, resource use, and habitat 

modification. Chemical and microbial contaminants will 

increasingly affect the quality of water, air, and consumables. 

These factors make understanding environmental and ecological health a prerequisite to protecting the health of the American public and the world.

Background

Environmental health threats to the Nation’s citizens are 

an inescapable consequence of the interactions between people 

and their physical, chemical, and biological environment 

(Friend, 2006; Plumlee and Ziegler, 2004). As towns and cities 

expand, the wildland-urban interface broadens and humanwildlife interactions are increasingly frequent. Many public 

health issues affecting Americans, such as avian influenza, 

originate outside our borders, requiring the Nation to maintain 

global vigilance for potential health threats. The emergence of 

many new human diseases in recent years is directly related 

to worldwide increases in population density, mobility, and 

environmental disruption. Major health threats also arise from 

naturally occurring toxicants and anthropogenically derived 

environmental contaminants. Such contaminants are increasingly appearing in natural ecosystems. Some of these contaminants are bioaccumulative; they persist in the environment 

and accumulate in living organisms and tend to increase up 

the food chain. The health consequences of chronic exposure 

of low levels of these substances are commonly unknown but 

potentially important. 

There is mounting evidence that environmental factors 

contribute substantially to many diseases of major public health 

significance throughout the world. The National Institute of 

Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) attributes an estimated 24 percent of the global disease burden and 23 percent 

of all human deaths to environmental factors (National Institute 

of Environmental Health, 2006). The NIEHS 2006 to 2011 

Strategic Plan emphasizes that, “The environment represents a 

key contributor to human health and disease” and cites the need 

for interdisciplinary teams to “understand how the environment influences the development and progression of disease.” 

39
40 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Statement of Strategic Science Direction

The USGS can contribute substantially to public health decisionmaking. As the only integrated natural resources 

research bureau in the Federal Government, USGS is the primary governmental agency responsible for monitoring wildlife (Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918) and is at the forefront of identifying wild animal disease 

reservoirs. With this expertise, USGS science complements and can augment public health decisionmaking 

in America. In addition, USGS serves as an unbiased translator of environmental information 

to help address public health needs. USGS scientists have a national scope and transdisciplinary approach 

to addressing environmental aspects of human health issues and are among the world’s experts on wild 

animal disease transmission to humans, drinking-water contaminants, air-dust-soil-sediment-rock contaminants, 

pathogens in recreational water, and the use of wild animals as sentinels of human health (see http://health.usgs.gov/). The 

position of USGS as a nonregulatory agency, with capabilities in environmental monitoring and mapping at all scales from 

national to local, and the ability to understand environmental and ecological processes, is found nowhere else in the Federal 

Government. Thus, the USGS is uniquely qualified to provide the information needed to link environmental and human 

health issues. To use this expertise in support of the Nation’s health needs, the USGS will fully integrate its massive data 

holdings and produce a national database and atlas of geology- and ecology-sourced diseases and toxicants. Once this atlas is 

in place, the USGS will partner with allied health science agencies to support spatially related health issues. 

Bird Deaths from West Nile. 

Bird deaths from West Nile virus 

infections January 1 to July 11, 

2006. Birds are sentinels of human 

exposure to this virus, which is 

transferred to people by mosquitoes. 

The national dead-bird infection 

data can be translated into an 

epidemiological tool by adding 

information on climate, land use, 

and human demographics that are 

related to incidence, prevalence, 

and persistence in human exposure 

to existing mosquito 

populations. Positive Test Results

SamplesSubmitted

No Data

Explanation

Strategic Focus

The USGS proposes to provide the scientific and monitoring information essential for helping the Nation to identify 

existing, emerging, and resurging environmental and ecosystem 

health threats. This strategic goal will be achieved by integrating 

existing USGS human-health related data, by establishing an 

interactive information system for environmental threats, thus 

clarifying potential environmental disease pathways, by forming or strengthening teams to respond rapidly to human health 

threats, and by enhancing collaborative research with allied 

public health organizations. These steps will enable USGS to 

provide the scientific information needed for a clear understanding of the connections among all living things and the environments in which we live. This effort is essential to protect public 

health in the Nation and around the world.

Expand Access to Existing Data

Advances in medical science at the cellular, organism, 

and population levels undoubtedly will continue to identify 

environmental challenges to human health. Once these agents 

are identified, it will become essential to understand their local, 

regional, national, and even global distribution to mitigate 

their effects (see box on Emerging Contaminants). The USGS 

scientific workforce has the information—biologic, hydrologic, 

geologic, and geographic—to provide the Nation with powerful 

tools for characterizing the spatial distribution of environmental health risks to its citizens. USGS databases make up one of 

the most comprehensive and high-quality arrays of national, 

regional, and local biologic, organic, and inorganic analyses 

available from any single source (see database table in this 

section). Many of these data have been collected over varying 

time ranging from years to decades. However, the many data Overleaf: Photograph of snow geese. Scott Fink, Spokane, Wash.
The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health 41

sources are scattered across the USGS and not easily available 

to most users. If consolidated, this array of environmental data 

and information could provide the USGS partners and customers with unified spatially and temporally referenced sources of 

human health information. 

An important step in the overall goal of protecting public 

health is to integrate existing USGS databases into an information source that would quickly and easily portray potential environmental health threats and provide the underlying framework 

for partnering with health agencies in existing and future USGS 

environmental health studies. Because USGS scientists across 

the country continually monitor and conduct surveillance of 

contaminants and wildlife in the environment, the atlas would 

be continuously updated and provide a source of information 

to researchers and decisionmakers. The Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) National Environmental Public 

Health Tracking Program currently (2007) has links to a number 

of external data sources, including some USGS databases. 

The proposed USGS health information system would greatly 

strengthen CDC’s and other human health agency programs by 

improving their access to all USGS health-related data.

Strengthen Partnerships and Enhance 

Collaboration with Others

Realizing the full benefit that the USGS can provide 

to the Nation and the world on public health issues requires 

enhancing collaborations and partnerships with allied health 

professionals. Because most USGS expertise resides at the 

environment-health interface, fostering strong alliances with 

public health, domestic-animal health, and sister environmental agencies is essential for effective problem-solving. To 

enable efficient linkages between science needs and resource 

investments, these alliances require cooperation and regular 

communication to set priorities, plan and conduct joint studies, 

and disseminate information, data, and reports. 

The USGS has already established partnerships with the 

CDC, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Indian Health 

Service, and NIEHS that are facilitating collaboration. USGS 

also has Interagency Agreements with the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

multiple state universities through the Cooperative Ecosystem 

Studies Units, thus covering collaborative work related to 

drinking-water quality, early detection of highly pathogenic 

avian influenza in wild birds in North America, and other 

human health needs.

The long-standing relation with EPA will be strengthened further when USGS can provide information on the 

environmental presence and potential for exposure of the next 

contaminants of concern for regulation and registration. Existing partnerships with other DOI agencies will be strengthened 

by the ability to define the role of public lands and fish and 

wildlife resources in public health protection. This research 

will provide an opportunity to build new relations with Federal 

agencies, such as the U.S. Departments of Defense, Health and 

Human Services (including the Food and Drug Administration), and Homeland Security.

activities to track environmental health issues, and it can also 

interpret the data in the context of key Earth, environmental, 

and ecological processes. Being able to understand the processes enables the USGS to help anticipate potential environmental and ecosystem health issues before they arise.

Manures from confined animal-feeding operations, such as 

this chicken house in Ohio, were sampled as part of the Source 

Characterization Study for Emerging Contaminants project.

Emerging Contaminants

USGS scientists collected water samples from 

a network of 139 streams across 30 states during 1999 and 

2000. The results show that a broad range of chemicals found 

in residential, industrial, and agricultural wastewaters commonly occur in mixtures at low concentrations in streams in 

the United States. The chemicals detected include human and 

veterinary drugs, natural and synthetic hormones, insecticides, 

and fire retardants. At least one of these chemicals was found 

in 80 percent of the streams sampled, and half of the streams 

contained seven or more. This study was the first nationalscale examination of emerging contaminants in streams of the 

United States.

The National Research Council’s analysis of Future Roles 

and Opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey (National 

Research Council, 2001) recognized the interface between 

earth system science and allied health sciences as an opportunity for the USGS to play a major research role in partnership 

with other agencies, including Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, National Institute of Environmental Health 

Sciences, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

to address environment-human health linkages. The USGS 

among Federal agencies has a unique role: it can apply an 

extremely broad range of interdisciplinary monitoring 
42 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Tracking the Highly Pathogenic Avian 

Influenza Virus

Worldwide there is great concern about the spread of the 

highly pathogenic H5N1 strain of avian influenza, which has 

caused over 150 human deaths, mostly in Asia. Highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza (HPAI H5N1) has also caused 

the deaths of millions of domestic poultry and numbers of 

wild birds in many areas of the world. The emergence of this 

virus has raised many questions that only field and laboratory 

research will be able to address. One of the routes by which the 

virus could enter North America is through migratory birds, 

and USGS biologists have been instrumental in developing and 

implementing the U.S. Interagency Strategic Plan for the Early 

Detection of HPAI H5N1 in Wild Birds. USGS field and laboratory scientists were the first on the ground sampling and testing 

live and hunter-killed wild birds for the presence of the deadly 

H5N1 virus. Sampling by USGS scientists began in April 2005 

in Alaska and has since expanded to the lower 48 States and 

the Pacific Islands, as the birds that were nesting in Alaska 

begin their southward migration. USGS researchers have a long 

history studying wildlife and their diseases and are uniquely 

qualified to evaluate the role of wild birds in the spread and 

maintenance of the virus and to identify the risk that migratory 

birds will carry this deadly strain to North America.

Avian flu sampling

Enhance Rapid Response Teams

The USGS has the ability to sample and analyze a 

broad spectrum of potential human health threats and the 

expertise to help interpret environmental processes (and 

possible human health implications) during extreme disease, environmental, and contamination events. USGS has 

rapid-response capabilities in several areas, most notably 

volcanoes, earthquakes, and wildlife disease outbreaks 

important to public health. These efforts could be replicated and should increase the focus of USGS on environmental, ecosystem, and human health aspects of potential 

human health events. This proposed new effort needs to be 

broadened to include a collaborative and cooperative rapid 

response capability for characterizing the scientific underpinnings of events related to human health threats. This 

capability will focus on providing sound scientific data and 

modeling future disease outcomes to assist in dealing with 

catastrophic natural or anthropogenic events, such as newly 

introduced pathogens, earthquakes, floods, or extreme 

contamination. This response capability would complement 

existing USGS rapid response to wildlife disease and to 

toxicological studies and would provide valuable information to other agencies charged with public health and 

emergency response.
The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health 43

Expand Understanding of Environmental 

Disease Pathways

Within the framework of proposed collaborative efforts, 

the USGS will play a key role in analyzing and documenting 

the pathways and processes by which diseases are transferred 

from earth sources (rocks, soil, volcanic gases, dusts), water 

sources (trace metals, pathogenic agents, organic contaminants), and ecological sources (wildlife and plants) to water 

cycles, ecosystems, food chains—and ultimately to people. 

Traditional USGS expertise in biology, geology, and hydrology will be combined and integrated to clarify transmission 

mechanisms. Examples of the application of this expertise are 

shown in the associated boxes on mercury sensitivity maps 

and tracking avian influenza virus. Through understanding 

how these processes work, we will be able to provide public 

health workers with improved ways to mitigate newly emerging and resurging diseases. 

Develop and Implement a National 

Environmental Health Information System

The ultimate goal of USGS in response to the health 

challenges ahead is to establish and maintain a national-scale, 

environmental health information system. The system would 

serve as a clearinghouse for spatially referenced environmental 

information (data, research, modeling interpretations) linked to 

a set of Geographic Information System (GIS) decision-support 

tools. The system would: 

• Map, observe, and monitor the spatial extent of potential zoonotic factors in America, including potential 

movement patterns of diseases and wildlife; 

• Collect and disseminate information from a variety of 

interagency surveillance networks to locate, identify, 

and describe sources of environmental contaminants 

and pathogens; 

A partial listing of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) environmental health-related databases 

USGS DATA SOURCE COMPONENTS OF DATABASE 

NAWQA (National Water-Quality Assessment Program) Data Warehouse Data from 7,600 surface-water sites and 8,100 wells, 30,000 pesticide samples, and 8,800 volatile organic compound samples, 2,600-bed-sediment and aquatic organism tissue samples 

from 42 basins across the United States. 

NBII Wildlife Disease Information Node A collection of wildlife and human health related web resources, including zoonotic disease 

fact sheets, website annotations, journal articles, news reports, and maps. A Wildlife Health 

Monitoring Network linking wildlife disease surveillance data from multiple governmental 

and nongovernmental agencies is under development.

Canary Database (a collaboration with 

Yale University Occupational and 

Environmental Medicine Program)

An extensive database of journal articles on animals as sentinels of human environmental health 

hazards.

National Wildlife Health Center EPIZOO 

database

Documents over 25 years of information on epizootics (epidemics) in wildlife. It tracks die-offs 

throughout the United States and territories, primarily in migratory birds and endangered 

species.

National Wildlife Health Center 

(NWHC) DIAGDATA database

A record of specimens (from serum samples to carcasses) sent to NWHC for processing and 

diagnostic workup. Postmortem examination reports, as well as tests for bacteria, parasites, 

viruses, and toxic agents, are included.

National Geochemical Survey database National Geochemical Survey database stream sediment and soil geochemistry approaching a 

sample density of one sample per 289 square kilometers for the entire Nation and a higher 

density in many places. Geochemistry of igneous rocks and unconsolidated sediments from 

throughout the continental United States and Alaska. 

BEST-LRMN (Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends-Large 

Rivers Monitoring Network)

Contaminant concentrations (elements and organochlorines) in fish, fish health indicators, and 

reproductive biomarkers from the Yukon, Columbia, Colorado, Rio Grande, Mississippi, and 

Southeastern river basins. 

NASQAN (National Stream Quality Accounting Network) Description of concentrations and flux of sediment and chemicals in the Nation’s largest rivers.

NADP/NTN (National Atmospheric 

Deposition Program/National Trends 

Network) 

Nationwide network of precipitation monitoring sites. Includes data on the chemistry of precipitation. The network is a cooperative effort between many different groups, including the 

State Agricultural Experiment Stations, USGS, U.S. Department entities. Includes over 200 

sites spanning the continental United States, Alaska, and Puerto Rico. 

U.S. Coal Quality Database Detailed analyses of more than 10,000 coal samples from all coal basins in the United States.
44 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

enriched in potentially toxic substances, and contaminated 

water, sediment, and soil), all interfaced with the GIS and 

mapping capabilities of the agency. This system would 

complement existing and planned Federal environmental 

health efforts. The USGS health information system would 

provide a unique perspective on environmental health issues 

by including process-based and modeling interpretations of 

environmental health threats.

Strategic Actions

• Develop an online data atlas of potential environmental health threats that consolidates USGS data and 

information and provides data for researchers and 

public-health agencies to enhance the Nation’s ability 

to respond quickly to current threats and anticipate 

potential future health threats.

• Interpret the pathways and processes through which 

zoonotic diseases, contaminants, pathogens or vectors 

might affect human health; 

• Produce derivative risk maps that will delineate the 

degree of potential exposure to environmental sources 

of disease-causing agents that pose risks to human 

health in the natural environment; and 

• Model and predict how environmental risk factors for 

human health will evolve in time and space. 

Such a system would be developed across the broad 

spectrum of USGS disciplines, integrating biological information and research (origins, locations, and types of zoonotic 

diseases and their vectors), water-quality information and 

research (local- to regional-scale water contamination issues), 

earth-science information and research (locations and characteristics of major dust sources, geologic terrains naturally 

tissues. The USGS has identified water-quality indicators of 

mercury vulnerability to predict the areas where production of 

methylmercury (the most toxic form of mercury) is most likely 

to take place if inorganic mercury is present. Using information 

sources, including USGS water chemistry data from more than 

55,000 sites and 2,500 watersheds, the USGS created a mercury 

vulnerability map. The map shows strong geographic trends in 

the Eastern United States, with the highest vulnerability along 

the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coasts, in the Adirondacks, and 

in the Great Lakes region. The Western United States has some 

watersheds with high predicted vulnerability, but no geographic pattern is evident.

Explanation

0 - 2

3

4

5 - 6

7 - 8

Sensitivity Score

Mercury Sensitivity

This figure shows a mercury sensitivity map for 

aquatic ecosystems in the contiguous 48 States. Mercury in 

fish is the primary route of exposure for people and fish-eating 

wildlife. According to the National Academy of Sciences, over 

60,000 children nationwide are born with neurological defects 

related to mercury exposure. A nationwide map of mercury 

sensitivity is being developed at the USGS that includes 

mercury concentrations in fish, information from models of the 

mercury biogeochemical cycle related to land use and other 

factors, mercury sources, and mercury residues found in human 
The Role of Environment and Wildlife in Human Health 45

• Create new partnerships, strengthen existing partnerships, and enhance collaboration with other entities 

charged with responsibility for environmental and 

public health. Increased levels of collaboration at all 

levels are needed to address the Nation’s environmental health-related issues.

• Enhance rapid and long-term response teams to 

evaluate short- and long-term health implications of 

disasters. Identify and assess the changing patterns 

and root environmental factors related to chronic and 

emerging diseases.

• Develop and implement a national-scale, environmental health information system that combines biological, water-quality, and geologic information with GIS 

decision-support tools.

• Publish a report every half decade that includes the 

status and trends in environmental, animal, and earth 

science information. The report will describe the way 

conditions are changing, present new findings relating 

to public health, and explain the methodological and 

research contributions that USGS has made and transferred to managers.

Vision of 2017

The USGS has worked with health agencies around the 

Nation and the world to develop and maintain an international 

database and atlas of wildlife and geology-sourced diseases 

and toxicants. Based on these efforts, USGS scientists and collaborators in the medical and allied health sciences have made 

important contributions to describing and modeling environmental factors affecting human health. Public health workers 

are developing improved strategies to mitigate diseases and 

toxicants, based on USGS research to identify and understand 

the pathways through which toxicants and zoonotic diseases 

migrate in the environment and the processes by which these 

health threats are transferred to people from earth, water, and 

ecological sources. A national-scale, environmental health 

information system, developed and maintained by the USGS, 

provides maps to delineate the degree of potential exposure to 

diseases and contaminants in the natural environment so that 

decisionmakers can use these map tools to evaluate the risks 

to human health. USGS scientists provide rapid analyses and 

model environmental processes to provide a better understanding for dealing with the immediate and potential future health 

implications of catastrophic natural or anthropogenic events, 

such as newly introduced pathogens, earthquakes, floods, or 

extreme contamination.

The massive dust clouds and resulting dust 

deposits produced by the collapse of the 

World Trade Center towers have posed a 

health concern for individuals exposed during 

the initial collapse and subsequent cleanup. 

Interdisciplinary USGS characterization 

studies provided emergency responders, 

cleanup managers, and public health 

specialists with extensive information about 

the physical, mineralogical, and chemical 

characteristics of the dusts that pose 

potential environmental and health concerns. 

This scanning electron microscope image 

(white scale bar is 50 micrometers long) 

shows a typical dust sample, composed of 

a complex mixture of glass fibers, window 

glass shards, and particles of concrete, 

gypsum wallboard, and other materials that 

made up or were present in the buildings. 

A fact sheet on this topic can be found at 

http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/fs/fs05002.

A Water Census of the United States:

The USGS is the primary Federal agency responsible for 

scientific evaluation of the natural resources of the United States, 

including its water and biological resources. The agency has a 

diverse cadre of scientists and technicians who work on aspects 

of the status and trends of freshwater quality and quantity for 

human and environmental needs in the United States at the local, 

State, regional, and national levels. The USGS also has an existing infrastructure from which it can conduct a regular inventory 

of natural resources and water use, including water quantity, 

quality, and environmental water needs, in partnership with local, 

State, and regional water and environmental agencies. The USGS 

has the skills needed to better define the geologic framework of 

aquifers, physical characteristics of watersheds, geochemical 

aspects of soil, land-cover change, land-use practices, and related 

environmental factors, all of which affect the movement of water 

and its quality. USGS also has the biological capabilities needed 

to relate the presence of individual species, groups of species, and 

ecosystem function to the quantity, quality, and timing of water 

movement as well as environmental habitat requirements of those 

organisms. Its research on past climate variability enables the 

USGS to provide scientific understanding and modeling perspectives for expected changes in water availability due to ongoing 

climate fluctuations. Its ground-water flow models are the international standard, and, when coupled with watershed, water-quality, 

and ecosystem models, will enable decisionmakers to better 

understand the consequences of water and land-use decisions 

before such decisions are made.

Quantifying, Forecasting, and Securing Freshwater for 

America’s Future

Background

A fresh and dependable supply of water is critical to 

sustaining life. “The strategic challenge for the future is to 

ensure adequate quantity and quality of water to meet human 

and ecological needs in the face of growing competition among 

domestic, industrial-commercial, agricultural, and environmental uses” (National Research Council, 2004). Many States 

expect future water shortages and are concerned about how the 

Federal Government could help them meet that challenge. Also, 

changing climate patterns will affect freshwater availability 

at the local and regional levels. Water is a key ingredient for 

healthy communities, economies, and natural environments of 

the United States. Yet, no comprehensive census of water information, summarizing the entire scope of freshwater quantity and 

quality needed for human and environmental needs, currently 

(2007) exists for America or is planned for the future.

In the past, water availability was viewed primarily in 

relation to human activity. Now, the use of water for environmental needs is a factor. Inclusion of environmental water needs 

in decisions about water can lead to “gridlock,” in part because 

insufficient information is available concerning those needs 

that all parties can agree on. Therefore, it is essential to obtain 

scientifically rigorous determinations of the timing, quantity, and 

quality of water needed to meet those environmental water needs. 

Providing data, understanding, and prediction capabilities relating 

ecosystem response to hydrologic conditions is the scientific basis 

needed for overcoming this water “gridlock.”

47
48 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Statement of Strategic Science Direction

Water is an essential ingredient for healthy communities, 

economies, and natural environments of the United States. The 

public and decisionmakers need current, accurate information 

that summarizes the full range of freshwater quantity and quality required for human, economic, and environmental health 

now and for the future. Therefore, the USGS proposes to undertake a Water Census of the United States, to meet the need for 

a comprehensive, scientific accounting of the status and trends 

in freshwater quantity and quality for human and environmental needs. By regularly and systematically collecting, analyzing, modeling, and interpreting information, the Water Census 

will provide continuous updates on the status of the quantity 

of freshwater available; the quality of freshwater needed for 

various purposes; how quantity and quality of available freshwater changes over time in response to use by humans and the 

environment, variation in climate, and adaptation of human and 

environmental use to climate variation; and whether sources of 

water at present not considered to be a freshwater resource can 

be made available for human and environmental needs. 

Fundamental information on how much freshwater is 

available, and whether that supply of freshwater is increasing or 

decreasing over time, is essential for the Nation’s economic and 

environmental health. Improvements are needed, however, in the 

determination of amounts of water used for irrigation, industry, 

mining, livestock, thermoelectric power generation, public and 

domestic supply, as well as environmental needs (National Research 

Council, 2002). Nontraditional sources, such as saline water, water 

reuse, or offshore freshwater aquifers, also need to be evaluated. 

As American population centers migrate to coastal areas 

and the arid west, where surface-water storage capacity is limited, 

water shortages will undoubtedly occur. In fact, in parts of the 

Southwest along the U.S.-Mexico border, because of pumping, 

ground-water levels already have fallen so far that many perennial streams like the Rio Grande have at times ceased to flow. 

Cities that rely on ground water (for example, Tucson, Ariz.) 

need to know how long pumping can be sustained. Conflicts 

over water are a concern of the States, according to a recent 

report by the Council of State Governments (2003). Not only 

is water scarce in some parts of the country, but, the report 

indicates, “...conflicts are occurring within states, among states, 

between states and the federal government and among environmentalists and state and federal agencies.” Tribal governments’ 

water rights are becoming a factor in water availability concerns, particularly in the Western United States, as for example, 

in Klamath Lake, Oregon. Many States expect future water 

shortages and are concerned about how the Federal Government 

could help them meet that challenge (U.S. General Accounting 

Office, 2003). Changing climate patterns can affect freshwater 

availability at the local and regional levels (National Science 

and Technology Council, 2004). Water availability conflicts 

also are likely to arise from future needs to develop energy or 

mineral resources. For example, the large amounts of water 

needed to produce oil from oil shale could be in direct conflict 

with community or agricultural needs for water in arid areas. In 

humid areas, these activity conflicts might relate more to waterquality needs of aquatic ecosystems than to quantity needs of 

humans. Water requirements (both quantity and quality) also 

now include the recognized needs of the natural environment, 

such as aquatic fish, wildlife, and native vegetation communities 

associated with those water resources.

The USGS will develop a Water Census of the United States to inform the public and decisionmakers about:

(1) The status of its freshwater resources and how they are changing;

(2) A more precise determination of water use for meeting future human, environmental, and wildlife needs;

(3) How freshwater availability is related to natural storage and movement of water as well as 

engineered systems, water use, and related transfer;

(4) How to identify water sources, not commonly thought to be a resource, that might 

provide freshwater for human and environmental needs; and

(5) Forecasts of likely outcomes of water availability, water quality, and aquatic ecosystem health due to

changes in land use and land cover, natural and engineered infrastructure, water use, and climate.

USGS scientists sampling fish populations on the Big Wood River 

near Gannett, Idaho, with a backpack electroshocker. Photograph 

by Mark Hardy, U.S. Geological Survey.
A Water Census of the United States 49

The Water Census will focus on the 21 water-resources 

regions of the Nation, including their watersheds and associated aquifers (U.S. Geological Survey, 1982) as well as offshore 

extents (see following box titled Water-Resources Regions). 

Each region has local and regional aspects of water supply and 

demand that must be considered in determining where the water 

is located, how much freshwater is present, the quality of that 

water, the amount of water used, and if that supply of freshwater 

is stable, increasing, or decreasing. Strong partnerships among 

local, State, regional, and Federal agencies, through efforts like 

the Cooperative Water Program, will ensure that local needs and 

the goals of the national Water Census are met.

New scientific approaches will be developed to understand 

and quantify current and future water demand and availability 

for the Nation. These approaches will be based on a rigorous 

and systematic quantification of the components of the water 

cycle. Monitoring networks and research groups within the 

USGS will establish definitive and scientifically defensible 

freshwater supply and demand data for the major watersheds 

and aquifers of the Nation. Research is needed to better define 

the characteristics of watersheds and aquifers that constrain how 

much water can be stored and transmitted. The Water Census 

also will require improvements in the mapping and description of the geologic and geomorphic framework of the Nation’s 

principal aquifers and watershed systems, particularly in coastal 

areas and regions of fractured rock and karst settings. Research 

is needed in developing indirect methods of estimating water 

use where a direct measure of use is not practical or obtainable 

and for projecting realistic water-use estimates for human and 

environmental needs in the future.

USGS scientists collecting a biological sample (benthic invertebrates) in the Stony Brook at Princeton, New Jersey. Photograph by 

Denis Sun, U.S. Geological Survey.

Strategic Focus

The USGS is the primary Federal agency responsible 

for scientific evaluation of the natural resources of the United 

States, including its water resources, and many of its current 

programs provide the foundation upon which the Water Census 

of the United States can be built. It is envisioned that the additional information needed to address these challenges, initiated 

through the Water Census of the United States, will allow a 

systematic, periodic determination of the following:

• Freshwater quantity and quality present in surface water, 

ground water, snow and ice, and water infrastructure;

• Freshwater quantity and quality needed to meet human 

and environmental uses; and

• Changes over time in freshwater quantity and quality in 

response to changes in climate, land use and land cover, 

and human and environmental water needs.

The results of the Water Census will provide individuals, communities, and State and national decisionmakers 

with information on how much freshwater is available in the 

Nation and whether the supply of, and demand for, freshwater 

is increasing or decreasing. It will answer the key question of 

whether there is enough freshwater, in the quantity and quality 

needed for various uses, to meet present and future human 

and environmental requirements. The Water Census also will 

enable scientists to forecast how the quantity and quality of 

freshwater might change in response to decisions about water 

or environmental change.
50 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

A major focus for the Water Census of the United States will 

be the construction of water budgets and water-budget models 

for all major watersheds and aquifers of the Nation. Water 

budgets require improved understanding and measurement 

of the changes in water entering a watershed or aquifer, the 

amount of water stored, and the amounts of water leaving 

the watershed or aquifer. Water-budget models will enable 

the forecasting of likely outcomes in relation to anticipated 

changes in water entering a watershed or aquifer (wetter or 

drier climate conditions, human alteration of water movement 

between watersheds and aquifers) or in water use (for human, 

environmental, and wildlife needs).

Determining the rate at which the water in an aquifer is 

replenished requires improved understanding of water movement from the land surface to the water table, a process known 

as recharge, which in turn requires improved understanding 

of the underlying geologic framework and permeability of 

surface soils. How long water stays on the land surface before 

it moves to streams as runoff, or how likely precipitation 

that falls on the land surface is to enter the subsurface and be 

added to an aquifer, is also a function of the type of land cover 

and land use. These processes, in conjunction with various 

proof-of-concept, studies for the development of a Water 

Census. The pilot projects will assess needed improvements 

in data and data networks that define the resource, improve 

understanding of the links between the different components 

of the hydrologic cycle, and determine water use, including 

environmental needs. These pilot studies will demonstrate the 

best ways to evaluate freshwater resources and to deliver the 

information in a manner that is most helpful to planners and 

policymakers working at local, regional, and national levels. Full implementation of the Water Census for the United 

States will take what is 

developed in the pilot 

studies to other major 

water-resources regions 

and would add a national 

synthesis to provide an 

overview of the status 

and trends of the Nation’s 

freshwater resources in 

formats useful to policymakers, public officials, 

and the general public.

SOURIS-RED-RAINY

UPPER

MISSISSIPPI

OHIO

MISSOURI

PACIFIC

NORTHWEST

GREAT BASIN

ARKANSAS-WHITE-RED

TEXAS-GULF

LOWER

COLORADO

RIO

GRANDE

UPPER

COLORADO

GREAT

LAKES

 LOWER

MISSISSIPPI

SOUTH ATLANTIC-GULF

NEW ENGLAND

MID ATLANTIC

TENNESSEE

CALIFORNIA ALASKA

HAWAIIAN

 ISLANDS

PUERTO RICO

USGS hydrologist lowers water-quality sampling equipment into 

the Mattaponi River near Beulahville, Virginia.

Water-Resources Regions 

The Water Census will focus on the 21 waterresources regions of the Nation, including their watersheds and 

associated aquifers (defined in U.S. Geological Survey, 1982); 

the regions also include offshore freshwater aquifers for waterresources regions along the coasts.

Two current USGS projects, one in the Great Lakes 

Region and another on the Lower Colorado River between 

California, Nevada, and Arizona, could be used as pilot, or 
A Water Census of the United States 51

geochemical aspects, also are factors in determining the quality of the water in recharge and runoff changes as water moves 

through a watershed or aquifer. Therefore, the Water Census 

will provide a better understanding of the relation of environmental needs and land cover and land use on the movement of 

water in watersheds or aquifers, through scientific quantification of environmental factors and water needs, and regular 

determination of changes in factors, such as land cover and 

human land-use patterns.

The quantity of water available for any given purpose is 

directly related to the quality needed. Watersheds and aquifers can contain water that is not suitable for human drinking purposes but that may be suitable for other uses, such as 

irrigation, industry, power plant cooling, or water needs of the 

environment. These nonpotable waters represent part of the 

water portfolio that in the past have largely been ignored but 

that will be included in the Water Census.

As USGS scientists analyze data and improve the 

understanding of linkages between various segments of the 

Nation’s water resources and demands for freshwater, the 

components of the Water Census of the United States will be 

refined to ensure that all suitable water in the United States 

is accounted for and that the status and trends in freshwater 

quantity and quality for human and environmental needs are 

clearly understood.

The Water Census of the United States will have benefits 

for the public and decisionmakers in addition to the systematic, periodic determination of freshwater quantity, quality, and 

use. Better understanding of the geologic structure of aquifers 

will improve our knowledge of potential water storage and 

the hazard posed by land subsidence because of ground-water 

withdrawals. Improved geomorphic description of watersheds 

will lead to better rainfall-runoff models and hence better 

estimates of recharge, runoff variability, and flood prediction. 

Knowledge of climate variability in relation to drought, 

especially placed in historical context, will lead to a more 

comprehensive understanding of drought frequency, severity, 

and duration for a region. People concerned about the quality 

of their water supplies will have access to better information 

about potential contaminants in their water. Knowing the 

water requirements of certain wildlife species will help people 

anticipate where animals carrying zoonotic diseases are likely 

to occur, or how changes in water on the landscape may affect 

wildlife distribution patterns.

The availability and use of suitable water is crucial to the 

Nation’s economy and natural environment. The goal of this 

proposed USGS science direction, development of a Water 

Census of the United States, is to provide citizens, communities, natural-resource managers, and policymakers with a 

clearer knowledge of the status of their water resources (How 

much water do we have and what is its quality?), trends over 

recent decades in its availability and use (How is freshwater 

supply changing in quantity and quality?), and an improved 

ability to forecast the availability of freshwater for future 

economic and environmental uses.

A USGS hydrologist measuring ground-water levels with an 

electric tape in a monitoring well in Albuquerque, New Mexico 

(photograph by James R. Bartolino, U.S. Geological Survey). 

Frequent and consistent measurements of ground-water levels 

are crucial for understanding the aquifer system and tracking 

water-level declines. 

Strategic Actions 

• Better define the ecosystem needs of the Nation’s natural landscapes and changing environments, relating the 

quantity, quality, and timing of water and the physical 

habitat requirements to the presence of individual species, groups of species, and ecosystem function.

• Expand the time-series data-collection capabilities 

for status and trends of water quantity, quality, and 

use, including water-use needs of biota, and make the 

information available to the public and to decisionmakers in increasingly more useful formats in a nationally 

consistent manner. 

• Promulgate the systematic definition and mapping of 

land-cover and land-use change for the United States 

on a continuous basis, to better understand how landcover and land-use change are related to water quantity, 
52 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

quality, and use for human and environmental needs. 

Use time-series of land-cover and land-use data, climate 

data, water-use data, and hydrologic data to demonstrate 

how changes in land use, land-use practices, climate and 

water use have resulted in changes in the availability and 

quality of water resources. Such studies are crucial to 

the validation of predictive models of how future decisions will affect water resources.

• Better characterize watershed, geologic, and geochemical frameworks across America, including changes in 

water storage and retention capabilities of aquifers and 

watersheds, through the development and use of new 

technologies, including geophysics and remote sensing.

• Refine existing ground-water and watershed models, 

and develop and use new modeling technologies that 

better reflect system interactions, describe uncertainties, and forecast changes in the hydrologic cycle so 

that resource managers and decisionmakers will have 

improved tools for predicting the consequences of their 

management actions on the quantity and quality of the 

resource. 

• Strengthen partnerships with local, State, regional, and 

Federal agencies to design and develop a Water Census 

of the United States that provides these partners, 

citizens, communities, natural-resource managers, 

and policymakers with a regularly updated, nationally 

consistent inventory of water resources and water use 

for human and environmental needs, and the predictive 

models that can be used to evaluate potential land- and 

water-use decisions.

Vision for 2017

A fully integrated real-time network of streamgages, groundwater level measurements, rainfall and evapotranspiration 

data networks, and water-quality and biological measurement 

sites will be enhanced and supplemented by remote sensing 

(state-of-the-art sensors, satellites, and telemetry techniques), 

combined with analyses and models that are based on longterm records, and coupled with greatly improved water use and 

The Price of Uncertain Water Information 

Western States experienced drought in 1976, and 

1977 began as another drought year. In early 1977, a forecast 

for the Yakima River Valley in Washington State indicated 

that the amount of water available during the irrigation season 

would be half of the long-term average—not enough for all the 

users in the basin (Glantz, 1982).

On the basis of the forecast of water availability, orchard 

owners leased water rights from those irrigators with senior 

water rights. Some farmers transplanted crops to other basins. 

Four hundred irrigation wells were installed, at an estimated 

cost of $9 million. Ranchers sold off livestock. However, by 

May more water was available than had been projected, due 

to the return of more typical amounts of precipitation. The 

inaccurate forecast of water availability resulted in substantial 

economic consequences for water users in the basin (Glantz, 

1982; National Science and Technology Council, 2004).

This example highlights the need to go beyond a description of freshwater availability to also address vulnerability of 

human populations (and the natural environmental heritage 

they value) to water shortages or excesses. The Nation needs 

to know which communities or ecosystems are vulnerable to 

difficulties because of insufficient freshwater quantity and 

quality, as well as which communities or ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to too much.

USGS scientists proceeding to make a streamflow measurement 

on the White River at Newberry, Indiana, using a boat equipped 

with an acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) and global 

positioning system (GPS). Photograph by Paul Baker, U.S. 

Geological Survey.

“Knowing how much water is available for use, and 

when water is available, are key for decision makers and 

the application of water law.”

National Science and Technology Council, 2004
A Water Census of the United States 53

demand information, geologic and geomorphic delineation of 

watersheds and aquifers, to provide the best information about the 

status and trends in quantity and quality of the Nation’s freshwater 

supply. This information is included in realistic analyses and 

models (in the form of geospatial and visualization technologies, 

interactive and related online tools, and other new technologies) 

that will allow local, State, and regional decisionmakers to better 

estimate the quantity and quality of water available for humans, 

wildlife, and environmental use. The resulting understanding of 

the Nation’s freshwater supply will provide decisionmakers with 

the tools needed to overcome “gridlock” regarding water required 

Rio Grande/Rio Bravo near Taos, New Mexico.

More than maintenance of base flow is involved. The 

science required for understanding environmental water needs 

“has evolved from one that simply indicated what minimum 

flows might be needed to maintain a particular species in a river, 

to one that recognizes the timing of flow is critical, or the fact 

that intermittent floods of a particular magnitude are needed to 

maintain the most suitable river bottom and flood plain form for 

suitable habitat for native species, or to keep invasive species 

from becoming established. Furthermore, the physical process 

of water and sediment movement sets the stage over which is 

played a complicated set of interactions among the biota. Despite 

the progress that has been made in the past decade, considerable 

uncertainty remains about water use requirements for the environment” (National Science and Technology Council, 2004).

for the environment and for human uses. The USGS provides 

quantifiable, scientifically sound information about water quantity 

and quality, including when and where it is needed, that allows 

a flexible and informed response by water decisionmakers to a 

wide range of challenges, including: drought; changing human 

populations; changing demands for agriculture, industry, and 

energy production, and to maintain a healthy environment; an 

accurate comparison of water use by invasive and native species; 

changing quality of the Nation’s water; and consideration of water 

not now used as a resource (such as saline water, water reuse, and 

freshwater aquifers offshore along the coasts).

Defining Water Needs of the Environment

Defining the water needs of the environment is particularly challenging. As we move forward over the next decade 

with the Water Census of the United States, defining those water 

needs will be critical. An example of how important this is to the 

overall understanding of freshwater quantity and quality available 

for human and environmental needs comes from the Rio Grande.

“The Rio Grande is the lifeline for an arid landscape that 

stretches from New Mexico through Texas to the Gulf of Mexico. 

The river is expected to support diverse and fragile ecosystems 

while at the same time supplying water for expanding urban centers, industrial complexes, and longstanding agricultural uses in 

the Southwestern United States and Northern Mexico. Underlying 

the river are regional alluvial aquifers that are the exclusive source 

of drinking water for Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and Albuquerque, 

New Mexico, and about one-half of the water supply for El Paso, 

Texas. These critical aquifers and the river are in direct hydraulic 

connection, operating as a single water resource—infiltration of 

the river water recharges these aquifers and, in turn, the aquifers 

provide life-sustaining base flow in the river. River diversions, 

reduction in recharge, and increased ground-water pumpage 

have significantly affected the sustainability of base flow in the 

river, which supports highly sensitive riparian habitats and native 

species, such as the endangered Rio Grande silvery minnow” 

(Anderson and Woosley, 2005).

Digital Globe’s Quickbird satellite infrared image, May 2002; 

drought conditions, Rio Grande at Gulf of Mexico. 

New Methods

of Investigation and Discovery

as well. This realization, coupled with advances in information 

technology, is fueling a worldwide movement to connect the 

data and research techniques of the world’s scientists, making 

them accessible to a global science community and transforming the way in which research, engineering, and education 

are conducted. An international consensus is developing on 

the need to leverage recent advances in computer science and 

related technologies to create a next-generation, integrated 

science computing and collaboration platform that will be as 

transformational as the Internet (Atkins and others, 2003). 

Over the next decade and beyond, as USGS scientists 

embark upon the strategic directions herein, USGS technological 

and collaboration capabilities must advance in parallel with its 

scientific goals and capabilities. To address increasing complexity and to enhance collaboration, the USGS must integrate 

its data and participate in the emerging efforts to build a global 

integrated science computing and collaboration platform. In 

partnership with the earth and environmental science community, 

the USGS must develop new approaches to index data holding 

by subject, place, and time and make them available to all 

through Internet portals. To stay relevant in a fast-changing 

scientific world, the USGS must stay abreast of key technological developments and routinely adopt new methods of 

investigation and discovery. 

55

Background

The USGS has long been a world leader in natural science monitoring, assessing, and researching. Coupled with a 

diverse multidisciplinary workforce, extensive monitoring networks, and national and regional scale approaches, the USGS 

has carved out a reputation for being the “authoritative source” 

of specific national data sets, such as water quality, cartographic base, land cover and land use, biological resources, 

and geologic mapping. As the future unfolds, the ability of the 

USGS to map and integrate these data will be critical for the 

advancement of all science directions. The conduct of science 

is changing worldwide. Evolving tools and technologies are 

revolutionizing processes, extending or replacing research 

techniques, and sparking new discovery. Advances, such as 

sensor networks, modeling, and visualization, are changing the 

scale, quantity, and quality of scientific observations and providing new approaches for exploring long-standing problems. 

Dramatic increases in computing power, storage capacity, and 

networking capabilities are widening the scope of investigation and allowing scientists to address increasingly complex 

questions (National Science Foundation, 2007).

The nature of scientific collaboration also is changing. 

As the complexity of scientific questions grows, the need for 

integrated expertise and data from multiple disciplines grows 
56 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Statement of Cross-cutting Science Direction—

Data Integration

Cyberinfrastructure Defined

“The term infrastructure has been used since the 1920s 

to refer collectively to the roads, power grids, telephone 

systems, bridges, rail lines, and similar public works 

that are required for an industrial economy to function. 

Although good infrastructure is often taken for granted 

and noticed only when it stops functioning, it is among the 

most complex and expensive things that society creates. 

The newer term cyberinfrastructure refers to infrastructure 

based upon distributed computer, information and communication technology” (Atkins and others, 2003).

The USGS will use its information resources to create a more integrated and accessible environment for its vast 

resources of past and future data. It will invest in cyberinfrastructure, nurture and cultivate programs in Earth-systemscience informatics, and participate in efforts to build a global integrated science and computing platform.

Data Integration and Beyond

The key to advancing new discoveries of the Earth’s complex systems and processes lies in the rigorous analysis of system 

interconnections and feedbacks. Central to the identification and 

evaluation of these connections is the accessibility of data and 

information across multiple disciplines, geographic, temporal, 

and political boundaries. Challenging scientific questions, such 

as those raised in this science strategy, require the analysis and 

integration of information and data across scientific disciplines. 

Data integration within the USGS is a prerequisite for joining 

international efforts to develop worldwide science collaboration 

and computing platform that can address future challenges.

Turning this bold vision of worldwide collaboration into 

reality will take global efforts to develop the cyberinfrastructure 

and informatics tools necessary to connect the world’s science 

community. Over the next decade, global networks of servers, 

such as GEON (Geoscience Network) and NEON (National 

Ecological Observatory Network), will provide access to vast 

data repositories at unprecedented speeds. The computational 

power of these global networks will provide on-demand processing of data as it is delivered to the user. Evolving optical 

networks will provide more efficient retrieval, enabling scientists to interactively visualize and analyze larger volumes of data 

and more types of results. Traditional downloading of data will 

be replaced by remote real-time access over optically switched 

networks with negligible wait times. Evolving informatics tools 

will provide new capabilities and scientific techniques, such as 

sophisticated modeling that will enhance predictive capabilities 

and forecasting, data mining across huge sets of multidimensional data, and 3D visualization of complex problems.

Strategic Actions

• Include planning for long-term data management and 

dissemination into multidisciplinary science practices.

• Adopt and implement open data standards within USGS 

and contribute to the creation of new standards through 

international standards communities.

• Develop and implement a comprehensive scientific cataloging strategy that combines existing data sets resulting 

in an integrated science catalog.

• Develop a sustainable data-hosting infrastructure to support 

the retention, archiving, and dissemination of valuable 

USGS data sets in accordance with open standards.

• Develop and enhance tools and methods that facilitate 

the capture and processing of data and metadata. 

• Identify and support authoritative data sources within 

USGS programs and encourage development and adoption of standards.

• Build and strengthen the internal workforce augmented 

by external partnerships in environmental information 

science.

• Identify and leverage national and international efforts 

that promote comprehensive data and information management and foster greater sharing of knowledge and 

expertise.

• Partner with collaborators and customers to facilitate data 

integration across the worldwide science community. 

• Partner in the development of informatics tools and 

infrastructure that contribute to the evolving global science computing and collaboration platform.

Vision of 2017

Scientific inquiry within and outside USGS and external 

customers all benefit from the enhanced accessibility of decades 

of observational data and analysis. The use of open standards and 

of tools has minimized the difficulty of merging or comparing 

data sets; searches on a location or topic of interest quickly yield 

comprehensive research data; and individual scientists can easily 

identify studies and other researchers relevant to their own work. 

For example, an individual scientist studying soil geochemistry in 

the Great Basin connects to a worldwide scientific computing and 

collaboration platform that includes thousands of USGS and other 

scientific research databases. She seamlessly visualizes her soil 

data and compares them to data on paleoclimate, rock geochemistry, dust sources and composition, geomicrobiology of local 

ecosystems, past and present surface- and ground-water chemistry, and other relevant data sets. 
New Methods of Investigation and Discovery 57

Statement of Cross-cutting Science Direction—

Evolving Technologies

Screen shot of Terrainmap.com, an example of shared data.

The USGS will foster a culture and resource base that encourages innovation, thereby advancing scientific 

discovery through the development and application of state-of-the-art technologies.

produced in large quantities to support demands of medical, 

agricultural, energy, consumer products, and other industrial markets. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has predicted that 

nanotechnology will contribute about $1 trillion to the economy 

by 2015. Today, nanotechnology applications are emerging much 

faster than the ability to assess and understand their risks and 

consequences. Only a handful of studies are available to assess 

the health and environmental effects of these new materials. The 

exploding development of new uses for nanoparticles creates the 

potential for broad distribution across the landscape. The same 

new properties that enhance their value to commerce may affect 

toxicology and environmental fate. Change that results from 

application of nanotechnology has serious implications for water, 

ecosystems, and human health. The interdisciplinary science 

expertise of the USGS is ideally suited to measure, monitor, and 

assess the risks of nanoparticles; develop a scientific understanding of their dispersal and remediation; and determine the implications of their properties for environmental persistence, cycling, 

and toxic effects.

Informatics Defined

The term “informatics” refers to the application of information technology in the context of another field. Informatics 

has been applied to fields as varied as biology, chemistry, the fine arts, telecommunications, geography, business, economics, 

and journalism. Within the field of science, informatics typically involves the development of new uses for information 

technology to solve a specific problem or to develop new understanding. Informatics efforts can be as varied as computational 

methods, modeling, visualization, or data mining. The field of “bioinformatics” focuses on the collection, management, 

analysis, and dissemination of biological data and knowledge, and has produced information management tools that support 

genetics and molecular biology. The term “geoinformatics” seems to have been independently coined by several groups 

around the world to describe a variety of efforts to promote collaboration between computer science and geosciences to 

solve complex scientific questions. Fostered by leadership within the National Science Foundation, these informatics efforts 

recognize that the Earth functions as a complex system and that existing information science infrastructure and practice 

are inadequate to address the many difficult problems posed by this system. For more information, access URL 

http://paces.geo.utep.edu/research/geoinformatics/geoinformatics_explained_detailed.shtml.

Leveraging Evolving Technologies

Innovative and continually evolving technologies—many 

of which cannot be foreseen today—have the potential to 

transform not just science methods but even the questions that 

science can ask. Several new and evolving technologies that 

are particularly relevant to the earth sciences are reviewed in 

this section. The challenges involved in developing the new 

technologies needed to address complex questions offer ample 

opportunities for collaboration, resource sharing, and leveraging with other Federal, State, and local government agencies, 

academic and research institutions, nonprofit organizations, and 

the private sector. Partnerships have long been a critical component of USGS science programs, and the USGS must be equally 

proactive in identifying and developing effective partnerships in 

support of its technology goals. Advanced research on technology is occurring in universities, in other Federal agencies, and in 

private industry. Over the next decade, USGS should continue 

to develop creative partnerships with these communities to stay 

abreast of the latest developments and to identify opportunities to advance USGS science capabilities through innovative 

technologies.

Nanotechnology

Nanomaterials (products using particles ranging from 1-to100 nanometers) are rapidly emerging as an important new field 

of industrial production that is revolutionizing the composition 

of products as diverse as medical therapeutics, road-building 

materials, tennis balls, electronics, energy storage devices, and 

ground-water remediation tools. Some nanomaterials are already 
58 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

USGS scientist inoculating microbial growth media to 

determine the number and type of microorganisms carrying out 

biodegradation in a contaminated aquifer.

Unsaturated-zone instruments used to estimate ground-water 

recharge are installed in oil-saturated soils at the Bemidji, 

Minnesota, research site.

Tomography (CT) scans, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), are providing a remarkable look inside people, 

promoting new understanding of diseases and physiological 

processes. Similar advances have occurred and continue to 

undergo development in the application of physics for seeing 

into the Earth, the field of geophysics. Advances in geophysics 

help us better understand seismic hazards, volcano hazards, 

ground-water availability, and movement of contaminants 

in the subsurface. A wide array of technologies is emerging, 

including many that are derived from the minerals and energy 

sectors. Research and technologies in this arena encompass 

use of gravity, magnetic, electrical, electromagnetic, gammaray, magnetotelluric, and other physical properties. Together, 

these represent a broad range of research and techniques that 

seek to image the region beneath the surface of the Earth by 

means of the interpretation of physical characteristics, waves, 

or fields measured at the Earth’s surface. Borehole radar crosshole tomography, electrical resistance tomography, continuous 

resistivity profiling, ground-penetrating radar, and aeromagnetic surveys are just several among the many technologies 

USGS must leverage in the future to gain a better understanding of the planet we live on.

Environmental Sensor Networks

Rapid advances in wireless, lightweight sensors portend 

the emergence of site-specific, regional, national, and global 

networks of environmental sensors that will expand the scope, 

efficiency, and accuracy of environmental monitoring efforts 

of the Nation’s natural resources and public lands. The next 

generation of automated sensors, deployed by the hundreds or 

thousands, could reduce the need for labor-intensive manual 

sampling of water, soil, air, vegetation, and wildlife, especially 

in remote areas. One example of a sensor network—referred 

Geomicrobiology

Geomicrobiology (sometimes the broader term “geobiology” is used) is the interdisciplinary study of the interactions 

of microorganisms and earth materials (including soil, sediment, the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, minerals, and rocks). 

Microbes play a quantitatively dominant role in which geology, biology, chemistry, and hydrology intersect within the 

Earth’s surface (Nealson and others, 2001). Modern molecular 

techniques (the use of nucleic-acid base sequencing technology to identify the phylogenetic groups present within mixed 

microbial populations) have significantly extended the classical approaches. Insights gained from the application of new 

tools have exposed previously unrecognized ties between the 

biological and geological worlds. Metagenomics (the genomic 

analysis of microbial communities) may be a tool to characterize the combined functions of microorganisms at a given place 

in the environment and to track a system’s fundamental biotic 

response to evolving environmental factors. These molecular 

technologies are at the cutting edge of science. Because of 

the importance of microorganisms to the earth system, and 

because of the explosion in the power of tools that are becoming available to understand and describe the functionality of 

these microorganisms, the USGS should expand its current 

geomicrobiology research, building upon the excellent work 

already underway.

Seeing Into the Earth

In recent decades, the medical profession has made use 

of new technologies that enable it to better peer inside humans 

through new applications of physics. New technologies, such 

as Computerized Axial Tomography (CAT) or Computerized 
New Methods of Investigation and Discovery 59

USGS scientist using a long sampling device to collect a 

sample of liquid from a municipal wastewater holding pond 

in Colorado as part of the Source Characterization Study for 

Emerging Contaminants Project. The sample was analyzed for 

pharmaceuticals and other wastewater compounds.

gram be established within the U.S. Department of the Interior 

to ensure continuity of moderate-resolution land imaging 

for the United States and to look to the future to develop any 

type of satellite land-imaging capability considered critical 

to meeting the civil operational needs of the Nation. These 

needs include scientific and governmental requirements, and 

encompass a broad sweep of Federal, State, local and tribal 

functions, including those related to agriculture, national 

and homeland security, infrastructure planning and management, and management of Earth’s natural resources. With this 

promise for maturing from the “experimental” phase of Earth 

observation to a long-term operational framework of land 

imaging, the science strategy of the USGS and its benefit to 

the DOI, the Nation, and the world are strengthened.

Spatial Modeling

Rapid advances in the technology of data collection have 

made it possible for scientists to describe complex systems 

in multiple dimensions in space and time. Data collection, 

for the first time in history, is no longer a limitation in many 

scientific disciplines, because of the accessibility and affordability of vast arrays of sensors and remote-imaging systems. 

Therefore, the challenge now is to synthesize this information 

with models and decision-support tools that can be used to 

communicate the consequences of human actions to decisionmakers and resource managers in a language that crosses disciplinary boundaries. Such models are simplifications of datasets and systems that are often too complex to understand and 

communicate intuitively. This simplification requires tradeoffs 

in generality, precision, and reality that vary, depending on 

the objective to understand, to predict, or to control ecological 

responses to human actions and environmental change. Recent 

advances in spatially explicit modeling have shown the need 

to as “smart dust”—consists of networked populations of 

wireless “motes,” each containing a solar or battery-operated 

microprocessor, memory, radio, and one or more sensors for 

collecting environmental information (temperature, vibration, 

acceleration, tilt, solar radiation, pressure, soil moisture; many 

other applications are rapidly emerging) (New York Times,

2005). The motes collaboratively sense and log multiple variables over time, relay data, and communicate with a central 

database that can be queried in real time. Sensor networks 

recently have been deployed to monitor microhabitats in the 

underground burrows of nesting birds (Mainwaring and others, 

2002); to document pressure, temperature, and movement in 

glaciers (Martinez and others, 2004); to observe subsurface 

water flow through soils (Cardell-Oliver and others, 2004); 

and to measure temperature and humidity gradients in a large 

redwood tree (Tolle and others, 2005). The National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) is an NSF initiative to 

collect and integrate diverse data at a continental scale, allowing scientists to recognize ecological interactions within and 

across regions, and make forecasts of ecological change. The 

backbone of NEON is a network of environmental and biological sensors concentrated at 20 highly instrumented core sites 

distributed across the United States, one in each of 20 climate 

domains. Participating in the development and use of these 

networks of sensors is essential for USGS to maintain cuttingedge, reliable, and relevant science in the coming decades.

Land Imaging

Just as the science strategy of the USGS encompasses 

a broad range of national concerns that directly lend themselves to the mission of the Nation’s natural resources research 

bureau, so too does the USGS manage the Nation’s land imagery in support of a broad range of national and international 

purposes. Since the early days of spaceflight, the USGS has 

maintained the land imagery archive of the United States at its 

Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science, which 

contains nearly 100 years of satellite and aerial photographs 

of the land surfaces of the Earth. These archives are indispensable to USGS science and other national and international 

science investigations, among them the very applications 

described throughout this Science Strategy Team report. Key 

among these imagery holdings is the archive of the Landsat 

program, the Nation’s principal land-imaging satellite since 

1972. Landsat provides the longest, most continuous land surface imagery of the entire Earth, a record unparalleled among 

the space and science programs throughout the world. In 

2004, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive 

Office of the President, declared Landsat to be a national asset 

because of its importance to the economic, environmental, and 

national security interests.

In 2005, the President’s Science Advisor called for a plan 

to ensure the long-term continuity of operational land imaging 

in the United States. That plan (currently in final review by the 

Administration) proposes that a National Land Imaging Pro-
60 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

to communicate to resource managers and regional planners 

the potential consequences of management actions through 

a process of scenario building and landscape visualization in 

response to land development and climate change. Using this 

approach, researchers use data from state-of-the-art airborne 

and satellite imaging systems, sensor networks, and predictive 

models to develop dynamic alternative landscapes that project 

future changes on ecosystem condition. These integrated, 

science-based modeling tools can be used to inform local, 

State, and Federal decisions by helping stakeholders visualize the effects of alternative futures on valued ecological and 

socioeconomic endpoints. Ultimately, the wealth of information made possible by state-of-the-art data collection systems 

can only be fully realized if it is translated by using equally 

sophisticated modeling tools into a conceptual framework that 

can be understood and discussed by decisionmakers. 

Molecular Genetics and Genomics

Recent technological advances in genetics involving the 

ability to rapidly sequence an organism’s DNA have revolutionized basic understanding of biological and evolutionary 

processes. Contemporary applications have enhanced the 

ability to delineate the finest level of biological diversity as 

expressed through genetic diversity. These genetic tools and 

methods will increasingly provide sensitive techniques for 

diagnosing the presence and effects of environmental stresses 

on species, populations, and ecosystems at risk. For example, 

a special form of population monitoring considers effects of 

contaminants on plants and animals. Many contaminants are 

carcinogens or mutating agents that affect either the structure 

of DNA, its biological expression, or both. In genetic ecotoxicology, the potential effects of these contaminants on the 

health of an ecosystem or organisms are evaluated. Conversely, infectious disease is a natural component of all ecosystems. Understanding the role of the microbes (pathogens) 

causing these diseases enables managers to adopt strategies 

to modify their influence when necessary. Molecular markers 

can be used to understand disease processes, develop diagnostic methods, describe incidence and distribution of important 

pathogens, and develop strategies for prevention and control. 

Pathogens also can be used to control undesirable and invasive 

species (that is, biocontrol). 

The newest ecological genetic technologies include the 

use of genomics—the study of an organism’s full genetic 

material, known as its genome. USGS geneticists will increasingly identify and investigate the function and expression of 

ecologically important genes to shed light on the relations 

between genotypes (the organism’s exact genetic makeup) and 

phenotypes (the organism’s physical properties) by understanding the associated genetic and environmental interactions. 

Ecological genomics improves the ability to study the effects 

of evolution, population structure, gene function, and environmental change on specific species. 

Another emerging technology is development of genetically modified organisms. These are plants or animals that 

have had their genetic material altered to exhibit new traits. 

These “transgenic” organisms potentially can pass their new 

genes to close, wild relatives. Cloned genes in wild organisms 

could tip the balance within and among native populations, 

communities, and ecosystems. Thus, genetic and molecular 

tools are some of the most universal, powerful, and accessible 

investigative tools available from science today and in the 

future. Their application increasingly will play a critical role 

in USGS research.

Strategic Actions

• Enhance workforce expertise in evolving technologies. 

• Encourage internal partnerships between scientists and 

technologists.

• Identify and establish external partnerships with 

scientists and technologists, particularly in areas that 

the USGS does not have core competency.

• Develop “Communities of Practice” that share 

resources and actively seek to deploy evolving 

technologies.

• Accelerate the introduction and piloting of new 

technologies.

• Expand investments in areas where new discoveries 

and efficiencies have been realized through the 

application of innovative technologies to existing 

USGS programs.

Vision of 2017

The USGS cultivates a close partnership between scientists and technologists. Sponsored efforts have resulted in 

the introduction and use of innovative technologies. Priority 

investments, the recruitment of specialized expertise, and 

strategic partnerships have resulted in pilot implementations of 

breakthrough research techniques leading to new discoveries.
Like much of humanity, the perspective of scientists 

was forever changed by the image of Earth beamed back 

from Apollo 8. The picture of our lone blue planet against the 

black background of space enlarged the frame of thinking of 

many scientists forever. Nearly four decades later, scientists 

are still struggling to understand the Earth as a system, with 

highly interconnected biosphere, hydrosphere, geosphere, and 

atmosphere. Many nonscientists, too, have experienced their 

own transformative moments over the past 30 years, as globalization of economies, instant worldwide communication, 

and rapid transport of goods have altered old relations among 

nations and enterprises. John Muir’s quote from 1911, “When 

we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to 

everything else in the universe,” applies today as we recognize 

that the phenomenal economic expansion and improved public 

health of the past few decades have come with environmental 

costs, some of which may threaten the survival of humanity 

(Muir, 1911). In fact, the impact of mankind on the planet has 

expanded to the extent that we live today in what some have 

called the “Anthropocene”—a new geologic epoch in which 

humankind has emerged as a globally important force capable 

of reshaping the face of the planet (Crutzen, 2002; Clark and 

Conclusions

Transforming the U.S. Geological Survey

others, 2005). The ability of humanity to use an understanding of human-induced changes on Earth’s environment to 

help guide the use of the Earth towards positive outcomes is 

embodied in the term “sustainability.” This concept of sustainability symbolizes a desire not only to document what is the 

human use of the Earth but also to determine what it ought to 

be (Clark and others, 2005).

As the only integrated natural resources research bureau 

in the Federal Government, the USGS has a substantial role to 

play in helping the economy remain strong, the environment 

remain healthy, and the quality of life in the United States 

remain high now and into the future. This role is larger than 

the traditional one of providing expertise in mapping, geology, 

water, and biology. Major national issues of costly natural 

disasters, air and water quality, energy and materials needs, 

newly emerging diseases, invasive species, climate change, 

and even immigration form a web of linked dependencies 

among environment, societies, and economies. The USGS 

must transform its approaches to problem solving not only 

to address the issues of today but also to prepare for those of 

tomorrow. The questions are broad, the stakes are high, and 

the potential is there. No other organization in the Nation has 

This photograph of “Earthrise” over the lunar horizion was taken by the Apollo 8 crew in December 1968, showing Earth for the first time 

as it appears from deep space.

61
62 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

the breadth of multidisciplinary scientific expertise, the 

extensive national on-the-ground presence, and the wealth 

of biologic, hydrologic, geologic, and geographic monitoring 

capabilities and existing data at all scales, from microscopic 

to global. 

The Carnegie Corporation Report on Federal Environmental Research and Development stressed the fragmentation 

of the Federal environmental research system and noted that it 

“...is poorly structured to deal with complex, interdisciplinary 

research on large spatial scales and long-term temporal 

scales.” It also noted that the most dramatic act to reduce 

fragmentation within the environmental system was the inclusion of the National Biological Service into the USGS. It 

concluded, “...this consolidation brings together a significant 

body of life scientists and earth scientists in the same environmental research organization, and thus creates the potential 

for generating the types of interdisciplinary knowledge and 

assessment that have often been lacking in the environmental 

research system” (Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, 1997).

The USGS has already made strides to realize its potential. Integration of USGS science activities to provide the 

Nation with answers to the complex questions it faces is 

underway. In the preceding sections of this report, we have 

outlined specific strategic science directions that will accelerate that process. Implementing these science directions will 

ensure that resource managers and policymakers have the 

information they need to support decisions affecting ecosystems, water, climate, environmental health, natural hazard, and 

energy and mineral resource issues. These strategies provide 

stepping stones towards a larger goal of evolving the USGS 

into a fully integrated science agency in which the linkages 

among these strategic directions are explicitly addressed. 

The management of the Nation’s land, water, and ecosystem resources typically requires weighing tradeoffs among 

multiple criteria concerning multiple resources. The importance of identifying and understanding critical interdependencies is especially acute in decisions that require anticipating 

the interactive effects of changes in climate and changes in 

human resource management. In the not-too-distant future, 

a scientist will access a comprehensive array of biologic, 

geologic, geographic, and hydrologic data from past measurements and those being made in real time, use the data for 

models that describe the present state of the Nation, use highresolution projections of future climatic states to understand 

how the situation will change, and provide this information 

to decisionmakers and the broader public in the forms most 

suited to their needs. The future holds unprecedented opportunities for USGS science to improve the economic and environmental health and prosperity of people and communities 

across the Nation and around the world. The USGS looks 

forward to meeting the challenges of the 21st century.
Anderson, M.T., and Woosley, L.H., Jr., 2005, Water availability for the Western United States—Key scientific challenges: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1261, 85 p.

Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, 2004, Impacts of a 

warming Arctic—Climate impact assessment: Cambridge 

University Press. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, 

at URL http://www.acia.uaf.edu

Atkins, D.E., and others, 2003, Revolutionizing science and 

engineering through cyberinfrastructure: Report of the 

National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel 

on Cyberinfrastructure, National Science Foundation. World 

Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.nsf.

gov/od/oci/reports/toc.jsp

Bailey, R.G., 1996, Ecosystem geography: New York, 

Springer-Verlag, 204 p.

Betancourt, Julio, Schwartz, M.D., Breshears, D.D., Cayan, 

D.R., Dettinger, M.D., Inouye, D.W., Post, E., and Reed, 

B.C., 2005, Implementing a U.S. national phenology network: EOS, v. 86, p. 539–542.

Borger, Christine, Smith, Sheila, Truffer, Christopher, Keehan, 

Sean, Sisko, Andrea, Poisal, John, Clemens, M.K., 2006, 

Health spending projections through 2015—Changes on 

the horizon: Health Affairs, v. 25, p. w61–w73. World 

Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://content.

healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/abstract/hlthaff.25.w61

Burkett, V.R., Wilcox, D.A., Stottlemyer, R., Barrow, W., 

Fagre, D., Baron, J., Price, J., Nielsen, J.L., Allen, C., Peterson, D.L., Ruggerone, G., and Doyle, T., 2005, Nonlinear 

dynamics in ecosystem response to climatic change—Case 

studies and policy implications: Ecological Complexity, v. 

2, p. 357–394.

Cardell-Oliver, R., Smettem, K., Kranz, M., and Mayer, K., 

2004, Field testing a wireless sensor network for reactive 

environmental monitoring, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks, 

and Information Processing: Proceedings of the 2004 Conference: p. 7–12.

Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, 1997, Federal environmental research and development status report with recommendations, March 1997: 

Carnegie Corporation of New York. World Wide Web 

accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.carnegie.org/

sub/pubs/science_tech/fedenv.htm

Cayan, D.R., Kammerdiener, S.A., Dettinger, M.D., Caprio, Caprio, 

J.M., and Peterson, D.H., 2001, Changes in the onset of and Peterson, D.H., 2001, Changes in the onset of

spring in the Western United States: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, v. 82, p. 399–415.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006, CDC 

now—Health protection goals: Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, 

at URL http://www.cdc.gov/about/goals/hpg-fs.pdf

Clark, W.C., Crutzen, P.J., and Schellnhuber, H.J., 2005, Science for global sustainability— Toward a new paradigm: 

CID Working Paper no. 120, Science, Environment and 

Development Group, Center for International Development, 

Harvard University; also published as chap. 1 in Earth system analysis for sustainability. Schellnhuber, H.J., Crutzen, 

P.J., Clark, W.C., Claussen, Martin, and Held, Hermann, 

eds.: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press. 

Council of State Governments, 2003, Water wars, trends alert, 

critical information for state decision makers: The Council 

of State Governments, Lexington, Ky. World Wide Web 

accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.cviog.uga.

edu/services/policy/environmental/georgiacommittee/

whitepapers/waterwars.pdf

Crutzen, P.J., 2002, The Anthropocene—Geology of mankind: 

Nature, v. 415, p. 23.

Dorr, A.P., and Paty, A.H., 2002, Minerals—Foundations of 

society: American Geological Institute, Alexandria, Va., 96 p. 

Energy Information Administration, 2005, Annual energy 

review: Report no. DOE/EIA-0384(2005). World Wide 

Web accessed April 5, 2007, at URL http://www.eia.doe.

gov/emeu/aer/contents.html

Estes, J.A., Tinker, M.T., Williams, T.M., and Doak, D.F., 

1998, Killer whale predation on sea otters linking oceanic 

and nearshore ecosystems: Science, v. 282, p. 473–476.

Friend, Milton, 2006, Disease emergence and resurgence—

The wildlife-human connection: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1285, 388 p. World Wide Web accessed March 

8, 2007, at URL http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publications/

disease_emergence/index.jsp

Glantz, M.H., 1982, Consequences and responsibilities in 

drought forecasting—The case of Yakima, 1977: Water 

Resources Research, v. 18, no. 1, p. 3–13.

Heinz Center, 2002, The state of the Nation’s ecosystems—Measuring the lands, waters, and living resources 

of the United States: New York, Cambridge University 

Press, 36 p. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, 

at URL http://www.heinzctr.org/NEW_WEB/PDF/

Heinz%20Summary%20Final.pdf [2005 update available at 

http://www.heinzctr.org/ecosystems/report.html]

References Cited 63

References Cited

63
64 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

Heinz Center, 2006, Filling the gaps—Priority data needs 

and key management challenges for national reporting on 

ecosystem condition: Washington, D.C., 104 p. World Wide 

Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.heinzctr.

org/ecosystems/

Hinzman, L.D., and others, 2005, Evidence and implications 

of recent climate change in northern Alaska and other Arctic regions: Climatic Change, v. 72, p. 251–298. 

Hodgkins, G.A., and Dudley, R.W., 2006, Changes in the 

timing of winter-spring high streamflows in eastern North 

America 1912–2002: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 33, 

no. 6, p. L0640210.1029/2005GL025593.

Huntington, T.G., Hodgkins, G.A., Keim, B.D., and Dudley, 

R.W., 2004, Changes in the proportion of precipitation 

occurring as snow in New England (1949 to 2000): Journal 

of Climatology, v. 17, no. 13, p. 2626–2636.

Inouye, D.W., Barr, B., Armitage, K.W., and Inouye, B.D., 

2000, Climate change is affecting altitudinal migrants and 

hibernating species: Proceedings of the National Academy 

of Sciences, v. 97, p. 1630–1633. 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2005—IPCC 

special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage: World 

Wide Web accessed March 19, 2007, at URL http://www.

ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index.htm

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007—Climate 

change 2007: The physical science basis; contribution of 

Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Houghton, 

J.T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D.J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, 

P.J., Maskell, K., Dai, X., and Johnson, C.A., eds.: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, Cambridge University Press, 881 p. World Wide Web accessed March 6, 2007, 

at URL http://www.ipcc.Ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

Knowles, Noah, Dettinger, M.D., and Cayan, D.R., 2006, 

Trends in snowfall versus rainfall for the Western United 

States: Journal of Climate, v. 19, no.18, p. 4545–4559.

Mainwaring, A., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., Culler, D., and 

Anderson, J., 2002,Wireless sensor networks for habitat 

monitoring: Proceedings of the First ACM International 

Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications, 

p. 88–97.

Martinez, K., Hart, J.K., and Ong, R., 2004, Environmental 

sensor networks: IEEE Computer, v. 38, p. 50–56.

Matos, G.R., 2007, Effects of regulation and technology on 

end uses of nonfuel mineral commodities in the United 

States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2006-5194, 22 p. World Wide Web accessed April 9, 

2007, at URL http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5194/

Menzie, D., Tse, P.-K., Fenton, M., Jorgenson, J., and van Oss, 

H., 2004, China’s growing appetite for minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1374, 50 p. World 

Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2004/1374/

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005, Ecosystems and 

human well-being—Our human planet (summary for decision makers): Washington, D.C., Island Press, 165 p.

Mote, P.W., 2003, Trends in snow water equivalent in the 

Pacific Northwest and their climatic causes: Geophysical 

Research Letters, v. 30, no. 12, article 1601. 

Muir, John, 1911, My first summer in the Sierra: Boston, 

Mass., Houghton Mifflin, 354 p.

National Assessment Synthesis Team, 2000, Climate change 

impacts on the United States—The potential consequences 

of climate variability and change: U.S. Global Change 

Research Program, Cambridge University Press, 158 p. 

National Institute of Environmental Health, 2006, NIEHS 

2006–2011 strategic plan—New frontiers in environmental 

sciences and human health: U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services [NIH Publ. 2006-218]. World Wide Web 

accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.niehs.nih.

gov/external/plan2006/

National Research Council, 2001, Future roles and opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey: Washington, D.C., 

National Academies Press, 179 p.

National Research Council, 2002, Estimating water use in the 

United States—A new paradigm for the National Water Use 

Information Program: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 176 p.

National Research Council, 2003, Future challenges for the 

U.S. Geological Survey’s Mineral Resources Program: 

Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 139 p.

National Research Council, 2004, Confronting the Nation’s 

water problems: The role of research: Washington, D.C., 

National Academies Press, 310 p. 

National Science Foundation, 2007, Investing in America’s 

future: Strategic plan 2006–2011. World Wide Web 

accessed March 14, 2007, at URL http://www.nsf.gov/

publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf0648

National Science and Technology Council, 1997, Integrating 

the Nation’s environmental monitoring and research networks and programs—A proposed framework: Washington, 

D.C., Final report of the Committee on Environment and 

Natural Resources, Environmental Monitoring Team, 96 p.
National Science and Technology Council, 2003, Reducing 

disaster vulnerability through science and technology: 

Washington, D.C., Interim report of the Subcommittee on 

Disaster Reduction, 36 p. World Wide Web accessed March 

8, 2007, at URL http://www.sdr.gov/SDR_Report_

ReducingDisasterVulnerability2003.pdf

National Science and Technology Council, 2004, Science and 

technology to support fresh water availability in the United 

States: Washington, D.C., Report of the National Science and 

Technology Council, Committee on Environment and Natural 

Resources, Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality, 19 p. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL 

http://www.ostp.gov/NSTC/html/swaqreport_2-1-05.pdf

National Science and Technology Council, 2005, Strategic 

plan for the U.S. integrated earth observation system: Washington, D.C., National Science and Technology Committee 

on Environment and Natural Resources. World Wide Web 

accessed March 8, 2007, at URL usgeo.gov/docs/

EOCStrategic_Plan.pdf 

Nealson, K., Ghiorse, W.A., and Strauss, E., 2001, Geobiology—Exploring the interface between the biosphere and 

the geosphere: Washington, D.C., American Academy of 

Microbiology, 16 p. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 

2007, at URL http://www.asm.org/ASM/files/ccLibraryFiles/

FILENAME/000000001905/GeobiologyReport.pdf

New York Times, 2005, A web of sensors, taking Earth’s pulse: 

May 5, 2005.

Pimm, S.L., Russell, G.J., Gittleman, J.L., and Brooks, T.M., 

1995, The future of biodiversity: Science, v. 269, p. 347–350. 

Plumlee, G., and Ziegler, T.L., 2005, The medical geochemistry of dusts, soils, and other earth materials—Treatise on 

geochemistry: Holland, Elsevier, v. 9, p. 263–310.

Post, E., 2003, Large scale climate synchronizes the timing of 

flowering by multiple species: Ecology, v. 84, p. 277–281. 

Revelle, R., and Suess, H.E., 1957, Carbon dioxide exchange 

between atmosphere and ocean and the question of an 

increase of atmospheric CO2 during the past decades: Tellus, v. 9, p. 18–27. 

Sarewitz, Daniel, Foladori, Guillermo, Invernizzi, Noela, and 

Garfinkel, M.S., 2004, Science policy in its social context: 

Philosophy Today, Supplement 2004, p. 67–83.

Sekercioglu, C.H., Daily, G.C., and Ehrlich, P.R., 2004, 

Ecosystem consequences of bird declines: Proceedings 

of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 101, no. 52, p. 

18042–18047.

References Cited 65

Sinding-Larsen, R., Hovland, M., Shield, D., and Gleditsch, 

N.P., 2006, Resource issues—Towards sustainable use: 

Planet Earth, Earth Sciences for Society, 16 p. World Wide 

Web accessed March 14, 2007, at URL http://www.esfs.

org/downloads/Resources_2.pdf

Steffen, W., Sanderson, A., Tyson, P.D., Jäger, J., Matson, 

P.A., Moore, B., III, Oldfield, F., Richardson, K., Schellnhuber, H.J., Turner, B.L., and Wasson, R.J., 2005, Global 

change and the Earth system—A planet under pressure: 

New York, Springer-Verlag, 356 p.

Stewart, I.T., Cayan, D.R., and Dettinger, M.D., 2005, Changes 

toward earlier streamflow timing across western North 

America: Journal of Climatology, v. 18, p. 1136–1155.

Striegl, R.G., Aiken, G.R., Dornblaser, M.M., Raymond, 

P.A., and Wickland, K.P., 2005, A decrease in dischargenormalized DOC export by the Yukon River during summer through autumn: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 32, 

L21413, doi:10.1029/2005GL024413. World Wide Web 

accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://www.agu.org/pubs/

crossref/2005/2005GL024413.shtml

The Nature Conservancy and the Association for Biodiversity 

Information, 2000, Precious heritage—The status of biodiversity in the United States: Oxford University Press, 399 p.

Tolle, G., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., Culler, D., Turner, N., Tu, 

K., Burgess, S., Dawson, T., Buonadonna, P., Gay, D., and 

Hong, W., 2005, A macroscope in the redwoods: SenSys. 

World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://

www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~get/papers/tolle05redwoods.pdf

United Nations Environment Program/Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000, Sustaining life on earth; how the convention on biological diversity promotes nature and human 

well-being. United Nations Environment Programme, 

ISBN 92-807-1904-1, Decision V/6, 20 p. World Wide 

Web accessed March 19, 2007, at URL http://www.biodiv.

org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-05&id=7148&1g=0

U.S. Climate Change Science Program, 2005, Our changing 

planet—The U.S. climate change science program for fiscal 

years 2004 and 2005: Washington, D.C., 150 p. 

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, 2004, An ocean blueprint 

for the 21st century: Washington, D.C., Final report, 676 p. 

World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://

www.oceancommission.gov/documents/full_color_rpt/

welcome.html

U.S. General Accounting Office, 2003, Freshwater supply—

States’ views of how Federal agencies could help them 

meet the challenges of expected shortages: U.S. General 

Accounting Office GAO-03-514, 110 p.
66 Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017

U.S. Geological Survey, 1982, A U.S. Geological Survey 

data standard, codes for the identification of hydrologic 

units in the United States and the Caribbean outlying 

areas: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 878-A, 115 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2005, The U.S. Geological Survey 

mineral resources program five-year plan, 2006–2010: 46 p. 

World Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://

minerals.usgs.gov/plan/mrp-plan-2006-2010.pdf

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Mineral commodity summaries 

2006: U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va., 199 p. World 

Wide Web accessed March 8, 2007, at URL http://minerals.

usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2006/mcs2006.pdf

U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, Mineral commodity summaries 2007: U.S. Geological Survey, 195 p. World Wide 

Web accessed April 9, 2007, at URL http://minerals.usgs.

gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2007/mcs2007.pdf

U.S. Group on Earth Observations/Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction, 2006, Improved observations for disaster 

reduction—Near-term opportunity plan: Washington, D.C., 

National Science and Technology Council, 20 p.

Wickland, K.P., Striegl, R.G., Neff, J.C., and Sachs, Torsten, 2006, Effects of permafrost melting on CO2

 and CH4

exchange of a poorly drained black spruce lowland: Journal 

of Geophysical Research, v. 111, G02011, doi:10.1029/

2005JG000099. World Wide Web accessed March 8, 

2007, at URL http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/

2005JG000099.shtml
Background 

Although several strategic plans, science goals and business models have been developed for all or parts of USGS, a 

comprehensive vision—science goals and priorities that unite 

all bureau capabilities toward challenges for the future—has 

not been developed since the early 1990s. Without developing consensus and support for such an overarching vision 

and strategy, it will be more difficult for USGS programs and 

leaders to make choices that maximize the effectiveness and 

impact of USGS science. Many documents have been developed in the last decade that describe both the challenges and 

opportunities for the scientific community to contribute to our 

Nation’s goals. These source materials and those developed 

by the bureau and our customers will provide primary source 

material for the development and discussion of goals and 

strategies through which USGS can most effectively contribute 

to society’s needs. The USGS Science Strategy (USS) will 

be created by a small team of scientists from throughout the 

bureau who develop recommendations for the Bureau Program 

Council (BPC). An expanded team of technical experts will 

work with them as they develop ideas. All recommendations 

and ideas will be reviewed and vetted within USGS and by our 

stakeholders before finalization. 

Scope and Objectives 

The USGS Science Strategy (USS) will be a 25–30 page 

document that is issue driven, has a big picture focus, and is 

forward-looking with clear concise goals and objectives. The 

strategy will guide science planning and help identify bureau 

Appendix

Charter for Science Strategy Development

priorities for the next decade. It should be succinct with a 

focus on the major scientific and policy drivers for the activities of the USGS. The USS will be consistent with the broad 

guidelines/outlines of the USGS Strategic Plan and the Department of the Interior (DOI) Strategic Plan and goals. It should 

consider the full breadth of USGS science independent of 

sources of funding (e.g., Congressionally appropriated, reimbursable funding for domestic work and international work). 

The strategy should be largely independent of the organizational structure of the USGS. The focus should be heavily on 

future opportunities where USGS science can most effectively 

contribute to the Nation and the world. The focus should also 

be on the balance of our present scientific portfolio (e.g., 

monitoring, assessment, and research) and where that balance 

might be in the future anticipating changing societal questions 

and needs. It should describe new and/or altered capabilities 

USGS must develop to exert science leadership and contribute 

significantly in core areas. Both infrastructure and personnel 

skills should be considered.

While the USS should be visionary and integrative in 

science goals, it should also suggest some first-level objectives 

for each strategic goal. A critical part of the USS should take 

into account USGS’s existing scientific infrastructure, skill 

mix and science capabilities and provide recommendations 

for changes necessary to achieve desired outcomes. Suggested 

changes and strategies for the development or enhancement 

of capabilities will be monitored through changes in program, 

regional, and discipline plans. Identifying new and expanded 

opportunities for cooperation and collaboration with partners 

should be an important goal of the strategy, as well as a subject 

of first-level objectives in accomplishing our goals. 

67

Manuscript approved for publication by Mark D. Myers, April 6, 2007

Prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey Publishing Service Center, Denver, Colorado

USGS Publishing Staff

Edited by Jon W. Raese

Report designed and prepared by Vitmary (Vivian) Rodriguez and Amber Hess

Technical Reviews—USGS Executive Leadership Team

Robert Doyle, Deputy Director

Sue Haseltine, Associate Director Biology

Barbara Ryan, Associate Director Geography

P. Patrick Leahy, Associate Director Geology

Robert M. Hirsch, Associate Director Water

Karen Siderelis, Associate Director for Geospatial Information and Chief Information Officer

Karen Baker, Associate Director for Administrative Policy and Services

Pam Malam, Associate Director for Human Capital

Anne Kinsinger (acting), Regional Director Western Region

Tom Casadevall, Regional Director Central Region

Suzette Kimball, Regional Director Eastern Region

Carla Burzyk, Director, Office of Budget and Performance

Barbara Wainman, Director, Office of Communications and Outreach

About 200 USGS and other researchers contributed ideas to this document;

 their names are listed on the Website at the bottom of this page.

For more information concerning the research in this report, contact:

Strategic Science Team

Kevin T. Gallagher and Martin B. Goldhaber, Co-Chairs

Website: http://gsvarespandora.er.usgs.gov/science_strategy/