U.S. Geological Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—

Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Circular 1383–E

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover. Clockwise left to right: 

Great Blue Heron fishing in the Salton Sea. Photograph by Milton Friend (emeritus), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

USGS scientist collecting an emerging-contaminants bed-sediment sample at the Susquehanna River at Danville, 

 Pennsylvania. Photograph by Connie Loper, USGS.

Little Brown bat with fungal growth on muzzle. Photograph by Al Hicks, New York Department of Environmental Conservation. 

USGS researcher examining bass for abnormalities in Colorado. Photograph by USGS.

Squirrel Creek fire near Laramie, Wyoming. Photograph by Laura Hallberg, USGS.

The Blue Marble. Image by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Cover background. Elwah River restoration project, Olympic National Park, Washington. Photograph by John McMillan, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Inside cover. Headwaters drainage of Peru Creek, Colorado, and the upper workings of the Pennsylvania Mine. Photograph by 

Robert L. Runkel, USGS.
U.S. Geological Survey Environmental 

Health Science Strategy—Providing 

Environmental Health Science for a 

Changing World

By Patricia R. Bright, Herbert T. Buxton, Laurie S. Balistrieri, Larry B. Barber, 

Francis H. Chapelle, Paul C. Cross, David P. Krabbenhoft, Geoffrey S. Plumlee, 

Jonathan M. Sleeman, Donald E. Tillitt, Patricia L. Toccalino, and 

James R. Winton

Circular 1383–E

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Any use of trade, product, or firm names 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:

Bright, P.R., Buxton, H.T., Balistrieri, L.S., Barber, L.B., Chapelle, F.H., Cross, P.C., Krabbenhoft, D.P., Plumlee, G.S., 

Sleeman, J.M., Tillitt, D.E., Toccalino, P.L., and Winton, J.R., 2013, U.S. Geological Survey environmental health 

science strategy—Providing environmental health science for a changing world: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1383–E, 43 p.

ISBN 978-1-4113-3546-2
iii

Foreword

In 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published a Bureau Science Strategy Facing Tomorrow’s 

Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017. It provided a view of the future, 

establishing science goals that reflected the USGS’s fundamental mission in areas of societal impact such 

as energy and minerals, climate and land use change, ecosystems, natural hazards, environmental health, 

and water. Intended to inform long-term program planning, the strategy emphasizes how USGS science 

can make substantial contributions to the well-being of the Nation and the world. 

In 2010, I realigned the USGS management and budget structure, changing it from a structure associated 

with scientific disciplines—Geography, Geology, Biology and Hydrology—to an issue-based organization 

along the lines of the Science Strategy. My aim was to align our management structure with our mission, our science priorities, our metrics for success, and our budget. An added benefit was that the USGS 

immediately appeared relevant to more Americans, and it became easier for those outside the agency to 

navigate our organizational structure to find where within the USGS they would find the solution to their 

problem. External partners rarely approached us with a problem in “geology,” but they might need help 

with an issue in climate change or energy research. 

The new organization is focused on seven science mission areas:

• Climate and Land Use Change

• Core Science Systems

• Ecosystems

• Energy and Minerals

• Environmental Health

• Natural Hazards

• Water

The scope of each of these new mission areas is broader than the science directions outlined in the USGS 

Science Strategy and together cover the scope of USGS science activities. 

In 2010, I also commissioned seven Science Strategy Planning Teams (SSPTs) to draft science strategies 

for each USGS mission area. Although the existing Bureau Science Strategy could be a starting point for 

this exercise, the SSPTs had to go well beyond the scope of the existing document. What is of value and 

enduring from the work of the programs that existed under the former science disciplines needed to be 

reframed and reinterpreted under the new organization of the science mission areas. In addition, new 

opportunities for research directions have emerged in the five years since the Bureau Science Strategy 

was drafted, and exciting possibilities for cooperating and collaborating in new ways are enabled by the 

new mission focus of the organization.

Scientists from across the Bureau were selected for these SSPTs for their experience in strategic planning, broad range of experience and expertise, and knowledge of stakeholder needs and relationships. 

Each SSPT was charged with developing a long-term (10-year) science strategy that encompasses the 

portfolio of USGS science in the respective mission area. Each science strategy will reinforce others 

because scientific knowledge inherently has significance to multiple issues. Leadership of the USGS and 

the Department of the Interior will use the science vision and priorities developed in these strategies 

for program guidance, implementation planning, accountability reporting, and resource allocation. These 

strategies will guide science and technology investment and workforce and human capital strategies. 

They will inform our partners regarding opportunities for communication, collaboration, and coordination.

The USGS has taken a significant step toward demonstrating that we are ready to collaborate on the most 

pressing natural science issues of our day and the future. I believe a leadership aligned to support these 

issue-based science directions and equipped with the guidance provided in these new science strategies 

in the capable hands of our scientists will create a new era for USGS of which we can all be proud.

Marcia McNutt 

Director
iv

Contents

Foreword ........................................................................................................................................................iii

Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................4

Environmental Health Challenges......................................................................................................4

About This Report .................................................................................................................................7

What is Environmental Health Science? ..........................................................................................8

The USGS Role in Environmental Health Science...........................................................................8

USGS Partner and Stakeholder Relationships...............................................................................11

USGS Core Strengths, Capabilities, and Future Challenges to Core Strengths and 

Capabilities.............................................................................................................................12

Core Strengths and Capabilities..............................................................................................12

Future Challenges to Core Strengths and Capabilities........................................................13

USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals.......................................................14

Identifying USGS Environmental Health Science Goals ..............................................................14

Goal 1: Identify, Prioritize, and Detect Contaminants and Pathogens of Emerging 

Environmental Concern........................................................................................................15

Priority Science Questions.......................................................................................................17

Strategic Science Actions .......................................................................................................17

Outcomes and Relevance ........................................................................................................18

Goal 2: Reduce the Impact of Contaminants on the Environment, Fish and Wildlife, 

Domesticated Animals, and People ...................................................................................19

Priority Science Questions.......................................................................................................21

Strategic Science Actions .......................................................................................................22

Outcomes and Relevance ........................................................................................................23

Goal 3: Reduce the Impact of Pathogens on the Environment, Fish and Wildlife, 

Domesticated Animals, and People ...................................................................................24

Priority Science Questions.......................................................................................................24

Strategic Science Actions .......................................................................................................26

Outcomes and Relevance ........................................................................................................27

Goal 4: Discover the Complex Interactions Between, and Combined Effects of, 

Exposure to Contaminants and Pathogens.......................................................................28

Priority Science Questions.......................................................................................................29

Strategic Science Actions .......................................................................................................30

Outcomes and Relevance ........................................................................................................30
v

Goal 5: Prepare for and Respond to the Environmental Impacts and Related Health 

Threats of Natural and Anthropogenic Disasters............................................................31

Priority Science Questions.......................................................................................................31

Strategic Science Actions .......................................................................................................31

Outcomes and Relevance ........................................................................................................33

A Strategy for Communicating Science to Society................................................................................34

Strategic Actions .......................................................................................................................34

Outcomes ....................................................................................................................................35

Integrating Science Across USGS............................................................................................................36

Summary of Intended Outcomes...............................................................................................................39

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................40

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................41

Figures

1. Diagram describing the relations among environmental drivers, exposure to 

disease agents (contaminants and pathogens) through various media and 

exposure pathways, and the complex responses to contaminant and pathogen 

exposure that result in environmental disease .......................................................................4

2. Diagram depicting environmental health science as the study of the 

interrelations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of 

the living environment, and human health ...............................................................................8

3. Illustration showing the role of USGS in environmental health science, to 

provide scientific information and tools to environmental, natural resource, 

agricultural, and public health agencies for management and policy 

decisionmaking .............................................................................................................................9

4. Illustration showing environmental contaminant source and transport 

pathways......................................................................................................................................19

5. Illustration showing infectious disease transmission pathways .......................................25

Table

1. Agents of environmentally driven disease, exposure and transmission pathways, 

and corresponding examples of diseases................................................................................5
vi

Highlights

Earth Materials, Natural Earth Processes, and Environmental Health ..........................7

Why USGS?.............................................................................................................................10

Native American Communities in Alaska are Inseparably Linked to Their 

Surrounding Natural Resources............................................................................11

Providing Information About Potential Exposures to Chemicals in 

Drinking Water..........................................................................................................12

USGS Laboratories Are OIE Collaborating Centre and Reference 

Laboratories ..............................................................................................................13

Manufacturing Facilities Found to Release Pharmaceuticals into the 

Environment...............................................................................................................14

Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus in the Great Lakes.................................................15

Implications of New Fungicides in Streams......................................................................16

Tracking Wild Birds and Avian Influenza...........................................................................17

Endocrine Disruption in Fish Populations..........................................................................20

Anthropogenic Sources of Mercury and Methylmercury Identified in the 

North Pacific Ocean ................................................................................................21

Pesticides and Risk to Fish Reproduction .........................................................................22

Brucellosis in Wildlife and Livestock..................................................................................24

White-Nose Syndrome in Bats............................................................................................25

Reduction of Bacterial Kidney Disease (BKD) in Chinook Salmon................................26

Effects of Plague on Wildlife May Have Been Underestimated ....................................27

Endocrine Disruption of Immune Function in Fish............................................................28

Antimicrobial Resistance in the Natural Environment ....................................................29

Responding to Recent Wildfires and Their Potential Environmental 

Health Risks...............................................................................................................32

U.S.-Mexico Border Health Initiative and Environmental Health-Risk 

Assessment Along the Upper Santa Cruz River..................................................34

Uranium Production and Environmental Health ...............................................................36

Sensitivity of Freshwater Mussels to Ammonia Results in Lower Water-Quality 

Criteria........................................................................................................................37

Environmental Health and Hazards ....................................................................................38
vii

Abbreviations

ARG antibiotic resistance genes

AVMA American Veterinary Medical Association

BEHI Border Environmental Health Initiative

BKD bacterial kidney disease

CCD colony collapse disorder

DOI Department of Interior

EDC endocrine disrupting chemicals

GAO Government Accountability Office

HIV/AIDS human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

HPAI highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1)

IOM Institute of Medicine

NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

OIE World Organisation for Animal Health

ppb parts per billion

SARS Severe acute respiratory syndrome

SMB small mouth bass

SSPT Science Strategy Planning Team

μg/L micrograms per liter

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

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

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VHSV viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus

WHO World Health Organization

WNS white-nose syndrome

WQC National Water Quality Criteria
Lake Michigan near Sheboygan, Wisconsin, on a calm morning while USGS scientists sample 

dead and dying fish for viral hemorrhagic septicemia. Photograph by Gael Kurath, USGS.
U.S. Geological Survey Environmental Health Science 

Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science 

for a Changing World

By Patricia R. Bright, Herbert T. Buxton, Laurie S. Balistrieri, Larry B. Barber, Francis H. Chapelle, 

Paul C. Cross, David P. Krabbenhoft, Geoffrey S. Plumlee,Jonathan M. Sleeman, Donald E. Tillitt, 

Patricia L. Toccalino, and James R. Winton 

Executive Summary

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have 

bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, 

wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our 

lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources 

have been maintained because of our history of respect for 

their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value 

of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence 

of environmentally driven diseases caused by exposure to 

contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. 

New health threats and patterns of established threats are 

affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the 

environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging 

(new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for 

land and natural resources, quality of life, and economic prosperity lead to environmental change. Natural earth processes, 

climate trends, and related climatic events will compound the 

environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, 

synthetic chemicals and substances, natural earth materials, 

toxins, and other biogenic compounds.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study 

of relations among the quality of the physical environment, 

the health of the living environment, and human health. The 

interactions among these three spheres are driven by human 

activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; 

the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens 

and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals 

and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework 

for synthesizing natural science information from across the 

Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, 

agricultural, and public health managers.

USGS specializes in science at the environment-health 

interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the 

interaction among the physical environment, the living 

environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect 

ecological and human exposure to disease agents. The USGS 

is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural 

science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS 

provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis 

for management and policy decisionmaking.

This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses 

the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is 

best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework 

for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and 

outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy 

is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health 

activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders.

The “One Health” paradigm advocated by the World 

Health Organization (WHO; World Health Organization, 

2011), and the American Veterinary Medical Association 

(AVMA; American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008), 

among others, is based on a general recognition that the health 

of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably 

linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will 

require increased interdisciplinary research and increased 

communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that 

paradigm.
2 USGS Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the 

USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed 

with substantial input from a wide range of stakeholders. 

Vision—The USGS is a premier source of the environmental 

health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people. 

Mission—The mission of USGS in environmental health 

science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers, 

who use that information to support sound decisionmaking. 

USGS will provide science to achieve the following societal 

goals:

• Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants 

and pathogens of emerging environmental concern.

• Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the 

environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, 

and people.

• Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and 

people. 

• Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions between, 

and combined effects of, exposure to contaminants and 

pathogens. 

• Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and 

anthropogenic disasters.

Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address 

environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic 

management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 

addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, 

an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. 

Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic 

disasters (for example, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, 

droughts, fires, industrial accidents, oil spills, acts of terrorism, 

and pandemics) can cause immediate and prolonged adverse 

environmental health threats.

This strategy proposes that USGS take the following 

strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of 

this strategy: 

Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and 

pathogens of emerging environmental concern.

• Strategic Science Action 1.—Prioritize contaminants 

and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, 

detection, and management activities.

• Strategic Science Action 2.—Conduct research, surveillance, and monitoring to provide early warning of 

emerging health threats. 

• Strategic Science Action 3.—Develop approaches and 

tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, 

ecosystems, and species.

Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people.

• Strategic Science Action 1.—Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of 

environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage 

and mitigate contamination.

• Strategic Science Action 2.—Evaluate the threat of 

environmental contamination to the health of the 

environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, 

and people, and inform the associated management and 

protection efforts.

• Strategic Science Action 3.—Characterize potential 

human exposure to support establishment of health 

standards and contamination-reduction efforts.

Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, 

fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people.

• Strategic Science Action 1.—Determine the biotic and 

abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious 

diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals 

and humans.

• Strategic Science Action 2.—Establish how natural 

and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the 

distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and 

potential transmission to other animals and humans.

• Strategic Science Action 3.—Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in 

priority geographic areas.

Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions between, and combined effects of, exposure to contaminants and pathogens.

• Strategic Science Action 1.—Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or 

pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible 

to adverse effects from exposure to the other class of 

disease agents. 

• Strategic Science Action 2.—Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined 

exposure to pathogens and contaminants.
Executive Summary 3

Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts 

and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic 

disasters.

• Strategic Science Action 1.—Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the 

environmental health risks associated with disasters. 

• Strategic Science Action 2.—Enhance methods to 

anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental and 

related health impacts of future disasters.

This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies 

developed concurrently: 

• Climate and Land Use Change

• Core Science Systems

• Ecosystems

• Energy and Mineral Resources

• Environmental Health

• Natural Hazards

• Water

This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. 

The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is 

prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality 

of the environment, the health of our living resources, and 

human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, 

partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is 

essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is 

incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure 

that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues, and that products are provided in the 

most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. 

USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally 

and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with 

and take full advantage of the activities of others. 

USGS scientist sampling infant geyser in Yellowstone National 

Park to assess discharge of volatile mercury to the environment.
4 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Introduction

Environmental Health Challenges

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have 

bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, 

wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our 

lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources 

have been maintained because of our history of respect for 

their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value 

of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence 

of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental 

exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern 

worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established 

threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes 

to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands 

for land and natural resources, quality of life, and economic 

prosperity, lead to environmental change. 

Natural earth processes (such as erosion and weathering), 

climate trends, and related climatic events will compound the 

environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, 

synthetic chemicals and substances, natural earth materials, 

toxins and other biogenic compounds (fig. 1). Environmental 

drivers, such as climate change, may also affect an organism’s sensitivity to contaminants in the environment (Stahl 

and others, 2013). Organisms can be exposed to environmental 

contamination through multiple routes of exposure (consumption, inhalation, contact) and in many forms (drinking water, 

food, air, soil, sediment, dusts, and other aerosols), which 

are affected by contaminant occurrence and distribution in 

the environment (table 1). Similarly, pathogens spread in the 

environment and via other living organisms, and are transmitted to other organisms or people via host-to-host transmission, vector-borne transmission, or environmental exposure 

(table 1).

An environmental driver is any natural or human 

induced factor that directly or indirectly causes a 

change in the environment.

Changes in the use, handling, and disposal of chemical 

wastes affects the environment, the health of fish and wildlife, 

and human health by affecting the quality of the air (and dust) 

we breathe, the water we drink, the soil we till, and the food 

we eat. Other human-induced alterations such as changes in 

land use and increasing urbanization alter fish and wildlife 

habitats and ultimately species diversity. The increasing spatial 

interconnections between human communities and natural and 

disturbed ecosystems enhance the risk of transmission of zoonotic diseases from wildlife to people. Weathering, runoff of 

natural and disturbed landscapes, windblown particulates, and 

dissolution of harmful minerals in rocks and aquifers, as well 

as the environmental disruption from natural hazards increase 

the potential for exposure to contaminants and pathogens. 

New approaches to meet the increasing demands for food, 

water, energy, and other resources can introduce more contamination to the environment and increase exposure to contaminants and pathogens. Furthermore, unprecedented increases 

in international travel and trade, as well as climate change, 

further complicate efforts to protect the health of the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people. 

Environmentally driven diseases are referred to 

herein as diseases that are caused by exposure to 

contaminants (toxicologic disease) or pathogens 

(infectious disease) and are significantly influenced 

by environmental factors.

Environmental drivers Environment Organism

Natural earth processes

Accidental or intentional 

chemical or pathogen releases

Land use change

Resource extraction

Global travel and trade

Climate trends

Disasters

Air

Water

Soils

Sediment

Tissue

Inhalation

Contact

Drinking water

Food

Host-to-host

Vector borne

Environmental 

media

Exposure 

pathways

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Contaminants

Pathogens

Interactions Disease

Figure 1. The relations among environmental drivers, exposure to disease agents (contaminants and pathogens) through various 

media and exposure pathways, and the complex responses to contaminant and pathogen exposure that result in environmental disease.
Table 1. Agents of environmentally driven disease, exposure and transmission pathways, and corresponding examples of diseases.

Disease agents and 

examples

Exposure and 

transmission pathways Example diseases and agents 

Pathogens (agents of 

infectious diseases)

• Bacteria

• Viruses

• Protozoa

• Fungi

• Parasites

• Prions

Natural earth materials 

• Radionuclides 

• Metals

• Mineral dusts

Biogenic compounds

• Hormones

• Toxins

Synthetic chemicals and 

substances

• Pesticides

• Volatile organic 

chemicals

• Engineered nanomaterial

Host-to-host • Bacterial kidney disease in fish (agent: Renibacterium salmonarium)

• White-nose syndrome in bats (agent: Geomyces destructans, 

a fungus)

• Sarcoptic mange in wolves (agent: Sarcoptes scabiei, an arthropod 

parasite)

• Toxoplasmosis in feral cats (agent: Toxoplasmosis gondii, a protozoan 

parasite)

Vector-borne • West Nile virus (vector: mosquito)

• Lyme disease (vector: deer tick) 

• Sylvatic plague (vector: flea)

Water-borne • Arsenicosis (agent: arsenic)

• Cryptosporidiosis (agent: cryptosporidium, a protozoan parasite)

• Algal toxin poisoning (agent: cyanotoxins) 

• Endocrine disruption in fish (agent: ethinyl estradiol)

• Viral hemorrhagic septicemia (agent: fish rhabdovirus)

• Liver cancer (agent: trichloroethylene)

Food-borne • Minamata disease (agent: methylmercury) 

• Gastroenteritis (agent: Norwalk-like viruses)

• Salmonellosis (agent: salmonella) 

• Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (agent: prion)

• Avian botulism (agent: Clostridium botulinum Type C or E, 

a bacterium)

Air- and aerosol-borne • Highly pathogenic avian influenza (agent: the H5N1 virus) 

• Lung cancer (agent: radon)

• Severe acute respiratory syndrome (agent: SARS coronavirus)

• Asthma and other respiratory diseases (agent: ozone and particulate 

matter)

Dust- and soil-borne • Mesothelioma, lung cancers, asbestosis (agents: asbestos, fibrous 

erionite)

• Pulmonary coccidioidomycosis “Valley Fever” (agent: Coccidioides 

immitis, a fungal spore)

• Asthma, other respiratory problems (agents: urban particulate matter, 

natural dusts)

Introduction 5

A WHO study determined that an estimated 24 percent 

of the global burden of disease and 23 percent of all global 

deaths can be attributed to environmental factors (Prüss-Ütün 

and Corvalán, 2006). The threat of contaminants to the health 

of the environment and public health is widely acknowledged. 

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 

(NIEHS) stated “Experience tells us that virtually all human 

diseases can be caused, modified, or altered by environmental 

agents,” where they describe environmental agents as pollutants and chemicals, commercial products we use that enter our 

environment, and naturally occurring toxins (National Institute 

of Environmental Health Sciences, 2006). Only a small 

fraction of the 80,000 chemicals in use in the United States 

today have been tested for safety according to the 2008–2009 

Annual Report of the President’s Cancer Panel. They said 

“A growing body of research documents myriad 

established and suspected environmental factors 

linked to genetic, immune, and endocrine dysfunction that can lead to cancer and other diseases. ... 

the consequences of cumulative lifetime exposures 

to known carcinogens and the interaction of specific 

environmental contaminants remain largely unstudied” (President’s Cancer Panel, 2010).
6 USGS Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Continued increases in the types and number of contaminants and limited understanding of the mechanisms by which 

contaminants can cause adverse health effects are challenges 

to continued efforts to safeguard environmental health. Environmental release of engineered nanomaterial is an example 

of a new type of contaminant; new approaches and methods 

are needed to measure their presence in the environment and 

to assess their potential ecological and human health effects 

(National Science and Technology Council, 2008). Scientists 

are reevaluating current approaches for assessing risk and the 

potential health outcomes associated with exposure to environmental contaminants (Birnbaum, 2012). New challenges 

include defining the potential health effects of chronic exposures to extremely low (sub part-per-billion) concentrations, 

potential increased vulnerability of some populations such as 

the elderly or early life stages, the fact that exposures in early 

life stages can cause impacts much later in life or in subsequent generations, and exposure to mixtures of environmental contaminants that have unknown combined effects. The 

effect of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on exposed 

organisms is an example of the need for improved understanding of the mechanisms by which contaminants affect organisms (Vandenberg and others, 2012). EDCs increasingly are 

being recognized as serious environmental health threats, 

and in their first Scientific Statement, the Endocrine Society 

implicated EDCs as a significant concern to public health 

(Diamanti-Kandarakis and others, 2009).

Like contaminants, pathogens threaten the health and 

security of the Nation and its resources. Of particular concern 

are pathogens that can lead to global pandemics, and they 

are featured prominently in the National Security Strategy 

(The White House, 2010), the National Response Framework 

(Department of Homeland Security, 2008), and the National 

Health Security Strategy (Department of Health and Human 

Services, 2009). Most pathogens that infect humans are of 

animal origin (zoonotic) (Woolhouse and Gowtage-Sequeria, 

2005); the Institute of Medicine (IOM) stated “The significance of zoonoses in the emergence of human infections cannot be overstated” (Lederberg and others, 1992). Virtually all 

of the major pandemics to date have been caused by zoonotic 

diseases, including the Black Death, Spanish influenza, and 

HIV/AIDS (Morens and others, 2008). Between 1940 and 

2004, more than 60 percent of emerging infectious diseases 

were zoonotic; more than 70 percent of these originated in 

wildlife (Jones and others, 2008). Many emerging diseases, 

such as Ebola, HIV/AIDS, Lyme disease, Severe Acute 

Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), and highly pathogenic avian 

influenza (HPAI) had their genetic origins in wildlife (Friend, 

2006). Many zoonotic disease outbreaks are evident in wild 

animal populations before they affect people or domesticated 

animals. Therefore, wildlife health and disease monitoring serve as early warning indicators of environmental and 

ecosystem health and are essential to any information system 

designed to protect human health. Increasing coordination 

among wildlife, domesticated animal, and human health agencies will improve our ability to understand the potential for 

cross-species transmission (Jerolmack, 2012).

Diseases can no longer simply be regarded as natural 

regulators of wild populations; they often pose a serious threat 

to fish and wildlife conservation, an increasing challenge for 

natural resource management, and may threaten the health of 

humans and domesticated animals. Numerous endangered species are threatened by disease. For example, chytridiomycosis, 

caused by an emerging fungal pathogen, has resulted in global 

extinction of amphibian species, and continues to jeopardize 

the persistence of a number of species. In addition, the impacts 

of disease on populations of common species may result in 

major losses to ecosystem services on which we depend. 

White-nose syndrome in bats, for instance, has resulted in dramatic declines of insectivorous species that control important 

pests. The loss of these natural insect predators may result in 

damage to crops and forestry products, increased use of insecticides, and negatively impact the economy.

The scientific community increasingly is acknowledging 

the complex interaction within organisms of exposure to both 

contaminants and pathogens, and considering implications 

for the health of an organism, of populations, and of sensitive 

subpopulations. Figure 1 describes how environmental drivers 

influence the environment, human and ecological exposure 

to disease agents, and ultimately the complex responses from 

exposure to contaminants and pathogens that result in disease. 

The “One Health” paradigm, advocated by the WHO 

(World Health Organization, 2011) and the AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008) among others, 

is based on recognition by the scientific community that the 

health of humans, the health of animals, and the quality of the 

environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful health 

protection will require increased interdisciplinary research 

and increased communication and collaborations among the 

broader scientific community. This strategy is built upon that 

paradigm.

Contaminants are physical or chemical agents, 

including minerals, chemicals, toxins, and radionuclides, that are present where they do not naturally 

occur or at concentrations above those that occur 

naturally, and may cause harmful effects to humans 

or other living organisms.

Pathogens are biological agents, including bacteria, 

viruses, protozoa, fungi, parasites, and prions, that 

cause harmful effects to humans or other living 

organisms.
Highlight

Introduction 7

Many earth materials have been linked definitively to, or blamed (in some cases incorrectly) for adverse environmental 

health impacts. These include natural earth materials (such as volcanic ash and gases, desert dusts, bedrock sources of 

arsenic or other contaminants in drinking water), and earth materials extracted for use by society (such as historic mine 

wastes, fossil fuel combustion byproducts, commercial asbestos). The distribution, exposure pathways, and toxicity of 

these and many other natural and anthropogenic contaminants can be significantly modified by natural earth 

processes such as wind transport, water transport, and 

biogeochemical reactions. USGS earth scientists routinely collaborate with biologists, ecologists, and public 

health scientists to help characterize ecosystem and 

human exposures to earth materials and other potential 

contaminants, understand the influence of earth processes on distributions and toxicity of contaminants, 

and evaluate whether or not contaminants actually 

pose a health risk in given situations. Photograph 

courtesy of Marith Reheis, USGS, shows dusts emanating from Cadiz Dry Lake, California. More information is 

available online at http://health.usgs.gov.

Earth Materials, Natural Earth Processes, and Environmental Health

About This Report

This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses 

USGS environmental health science activities. It summarizes 

national environmental health priorities that the USGS is best 

suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for 

USGS environmental health goals, actions, and outcomes for 

the next decade. The strategy is intended to improve coordination of environmental health science activities across 

the USGS, and facilitate the dissemination of information to 

stakeholders. It identifies internal and external partnerships 

that are critical to advancing environmental health science. 

It will be used by USGS leadership in science planning and 

execution, and as a basis for budget initiatives, national guidance, and regional implementation strategies. 

In 2010, the USGS realigned its organizational structure 

by establishing seven issue-based mission areas around which 

USGS science activities are organized: 

• Climate and Land Use Change

• Core Science Systems

• Ecosystems

• Energy and Mineral Resources

• Environmental Health

• Natural Hazards

• Water

These mission areas build on the broad science themes 

outlined in the USGS 10-year Bureau-wide science strategy: 

Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey 

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

2007). This Environmental Health strategy is based specifically on the chapter titled The Role of the Environment and 

Wildlife in Human Health. This strategy also provides a 

foundation for USGS support of the Department of the Interior 

(DOI) Strategic Plan (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010).

With the establishment of the Environmental Health Mission Area, for the first time, the USGS has a focal point that 

helps integrate diverse environmental health science activities 

from across the USGS. This new mission area builds upon 

USGS core responsibilities related to environmental contamination and infectious diseases in fish, wildlife, and people. 

In November 2010, the Director of the USGS commissioned a Science Strategy Planning Team to develop an 

Environmental Health Science Strategy that encompasses the 

portfolio of USGS environmental health science activities for 

the next decade (McNutt, 2010). The Team included scientists 

from across USGS with expertise in a wide range of environmental health fields, from infectious diseases of fish and 

wildlife, to environmental sources, occurrence, and adverse 

impacts of natural and anthropogenic contaminants. The Team 

defined a broad range of USGS contributions to environmental 

health science, and incorporated input from numerous USGS 

scientists and managers, partners, and the public.
8 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

What is Environmental Health Science?

The USGS defines environmental health science as the 

interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the 

physical environment, the health of the living environment, 

and human health (fig. 2). 

• The quality of the physical environment includes the 

physical, chemical, and aesthetic characteristics of 

both natural environments (including those affected 

by human activities) and built environments (such as 

homes and workplaces).

• The health of the living environment reflects the 

health of all organisms from microbes to fish, wildlife, 

and plants.

• People’s health and wellbeing are affected by both the 

quality of the physical environments and the health of 

the other living organisms with which they interact.

The quality of our physical environment, the health of our 

living environment, and human health are inextricably linked. 

The interactions among these three spheres are driven by 

human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes. These interactions affect exposure to contaminants and 

pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases 

in animals and people. Changes in the environment affect the 

health of people and wild and domesticated animals. Changes 

in the health and abundance of wild and domesticated animals 

affect human health and wellbeing. The significance of these 

interactions to environmental health along with the need for 

increased collaboration across disciplines increasingly is being 

acknowledged by public- and animal-health professionals, 

conservationists, and environmental scientists. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the 

physical environment, the living environment, and people, and 

the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure 

to disease agents (fig. 2).

There are many definitions of environmental health; the 

definitions vary based on the perspectives and responsibilities 

of the authors. A value of the broad definition of environmental health science presented herein is that it provides USGS 

with a framework for synthesizing natural science information 

from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, 

natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers, 

regulators, and scientists.

A major implication of this definition is the integration of 

the study of infectious and toxicologic disease. The definition 

acknowledges the need to consider how contaminants and 

pathogens interact to affect an organism’s health (fig. 1). The 

need for such integration is recognized in the environmental 

health science community (Feingold and others, 2010). 

The USGS Role in Environmental Health Science

The USGS is a non-management, non-regulatory science 

agency within the DOI. The Bureau provides impartial and 

reliable scientific information on the conditions and health of 

ecosystems and the environment, on our natural resources, and 

on potential hazards that affect people. The role of USGS in 

environmental health science is providing scientific information and tools to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, 

and public health managers. The information and tools are 

used as a scientific basis for management and policy decisionmaking (fig. 3). In its current strategic plan, DOI states:

“Science is a key component of the Department of 

the Interior mission. The U.S. Geological Survey 

serves as the Department’s primary science organization ... Science is an essential, cross-cutting 

element that assists bureaus in land and resource 

management and regulation. Department science 

also reaches beyond the boundaries of Interior lands 

and the United States. ... products are available 

worldwide to provide credible, applicable, unbiased 

information to inform decisionmaking related to 

ecosystems, climate change, land use change, energy 

and mineral assessments, environmental health, 

natural hazards, and water resources.” (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010). 

Figure 2. Environmental health science as the study of the interrelations among 

the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and 

human health. USGS science focuses on the environment-health interface—the 

interactions among these three spheres.
Figure 3. The role of USGS in environmental health science, is to provide scientific information and tools to environmental, natural 

resource, agricultural, and public health agencies for management and policy decisionmaking.

Decisionmaking to Safeguard

Environmental Health

USGS Environmental 

Health Science Research

Environmentally Driven Diseases

Determining environmental health outcomes in terms 

of wildlife disease and potential human exposure

Environmental Disease Agents

Defining contaminant and pathogen sources, occurrence, 

and spread

Controlling Processes and Factors 

Understanding the processes that affect disease 

agents, exposure, and health outcomes

Science Needs for: 

• Managing reservoirs of emerging 

pathogens and sources of emerging 

contaminants, and protecting the 

associated vulnerable areas

• Managing the release, mitigation 

and remediation of the most 

significant environmental 

contaminants

• Preventing and controlling the 

transmission of infectious diseases 

among fish and wildlife, 

domesticated animals, and humans

• Managing the complex interactions 

of exposure to combinations of 

pathogens and contaminants

• Mitigating the environmental health 

impacts of disasters

Management Feedback

Management priorities and needs 

Introduction 9

USGS environmental health science activities (1) are at 

the forefront of identifying wild animal disease reservoirs and 

the sources of emerging contaminants; (2) monitor the quality 

of the environment and the health wildlife at local, regional, 

and national scales; (3) synthesize critical knowledge about 

wild animal disease transmission (including to domesticated 

animals and humans); (4) identify the environmental properties and ecological effects of natural and anthropogenic 

contaminants; (5) characterize potential human exposure to 

contaminants via drinking and recreational water, air, dust, 

soil, and sediment; (6) evaluate bioaccumulation and toxicity 

of contaminants to fish and wildlife; and (7) provide capabilities for geographic analysis and interpretation of environmental data. These agency activities are the foundation of USGS 

environmental health science. 

Although the USGS does not have a direct public health 

mission, information from these activities contributes directly 

to the work of partner agencies responsible for safeguarding 

public health, as well as the health of domesticated animals. 

USGS science is useful for defining human exposure to 

zoonotic and vector-borne diseases, parasites, harmful earth 

materials, synthetic chemicals and substances, and biogenic 

contaminants. Fish and wildlife can act as sentinels that provide valuable insight into threats to human and domesticated 

animal health.

The role of USGS in environmental health science 

is to provide scientific information and tools to 

environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and 

public health managers. The information and tools 

are used as a scientific basis for management and 

policy decisionmaking.

USGS scientists collected environmental data and samples 

in coastal areas affected by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil 

spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Photograph by Lori Lewis, USGS.
Highlight

10 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

The USGS provides science that is essential to 

safeguarding the health of the environment, the 

public, wildlife, and domestic animal resources. USGS 

environmental health science activities: 

1. Are at the forefront of identifying wild animal 

disease reservoirs and the sources of emerging 

contaminants; 

2. Monitor the quality of the environment and the 

health of fish and wildlife at local, regional, and 

national scales; 

3. Define the factors that control the ecology of 

infectious diseases that affect natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species. 

4. Synthesize critical knowledge about disease 

transmission, including to domesticated animals, 

and humans; 

5. Identify the environmental properties and 

ecological effects of natural and anthropogenic 

contaminants;

6. Characterize potential human exposure to 

contaminants through drinking and recreational 

water, consumption of fish and wildlife, and 

inhalation of or contact with air, dust, soil, and 

sediment; and

7. Synthesize, analyze, and interpret environmental 

data in a geospatial context.

Why USGS?

USGS science is valued by the public, industry, and 

regulators because it is not beholden to any particular 

customer or collaborator. As a result, USGS scientists are 

increasingly asked to serve as impartial scientific arbiters in 

many important societal issues.

The abandoned Mogul mine complex adjacent to Cement 

Creek, near Silverton, Colorado. USGS studies helped quantify 

metal inputs to Cement Creek from draining mine tunnels and 

mine waste materials. Photograph by Briant Kimball, USGS.
Highlight

Introduction 11

Native American Communities in Alaska are Inseparably Linked to Their Surrounding Natural 

Resources

The Alaska Climate, Ecosystems and Human Health 

Work Group is providing scientific information that 

explains the relations among ecosystem impacts, 

human health, and changing climate. The Work Group 

intends to improve the quality of information, services 

and technical assistance available to Alaskans, and 

elevate awareness about climate—health connections. USGS participates in the Work Group, which is 

co-chaired by the Alaska Department of Health and 

Social Services, the US Environmental Protection 

Agency, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. The Work Group meets to facilitate the exchange 

of ideas, data, and research opportunities, and communicates key priorities and needs to the Alaska Climate Change Executive Roundtable and the Governor’s 

Sub-Cabinet on Climate Change. Activities of the Work 

Group have included assessing the hydrology, water 

quality, and trace elements associated with placermining in the Birch Creek Watershed of central, Alaska; 

evaluating contaminants in salmon and pike; assessing 

the relationship between northern pike consumption 

and human mercury exposure as indicated by concentrations in human hair; promoting environment-friendly 

methods for disposal of medications; studying zoonotic 

and animal arboviruses; testing Black Brant for Avian 

Influenza viruses; monitoring marine mammals for 

fecal pathogens known to cause illness in humans; 

and West Nile Virus and St. Louis Encephalitis surveillance in horses. Photograph courtesy of Carol Ann 

Woody, USGS. More information is available online at 

http://www.climatechange.alaska.gov/chh.htm.

USGS Partner and Stakeholder Relationships

USGS provides science to managers and other decisionmakers at all levels of government (Federal, State, Tribal, and 

local). These include agencies within DOI, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, 

the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of State. 

Additionally, it is critical for USGS to improve coordination 

and collaboration with other science agencies that provide 

science to decisionmakers, particularly in areas outside of the 

usual scope of USGS activities, such as the health of people 

and domesticated animals.

The USGS Environmental Health Mission Area is committed to strengthening relationships with established partners 

and exploring new partnership opportunities. Fostering strong 

alliances with environmental, natural resource, agricultural, 

and public health agencies is essential to ensure that (1) capabilities for identifying emerging environmental health threats 

are enhanced; (2) resources are leveraged among partners; 

(3) data gaps are identified and filled; and (4) information is 

made available in a useful and timely manner. Coordination 

among government partners, academia, and nongovernmental 

organizations also will be essential in enabling efficient linkages between science needs and resource investments. These 

alliances will require cooperation and regular communication 

to set priorities, plan and conduct joint research, and disseminate information.
12 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

USGS Core Strengths, Capabilities, and Future 

Challenges to Core Strengths and Capabilities

Core Strengths and Capabilities

The ability of USGS to address a wide range of environmental health science issues is enhanced by (1) an interdisciplinary workforce with diverse expertise; (2) a distributed 

national presence and infrastructure; and (3) significant 

capabilities for data collection, analysis, and synthesis. 

1. Interdisciplinary workforce with diverse expertise:

• Expertise in characterizing the sources, occurrence, 

behavior, toxicological characteristics, and ecological 

impacts of natural and anthropogenic contaminants in 

the environment.

• Expertise in developing indicators (benchmarks) of 

environmental health.

• Expertise in the diagnosis, pathology, epidemiology, 

and ecology of infectious diseases, including the 

development of animal models relevant to both aquatic 

and terrestrial organisms.

• Knowledge of the influence of environmental and earth 

processes on the spread and distribution of disease 

agents. 

• Expertise in characterizing the environmental and 

related health effects of a wide range of human 

activities, natural processes (weathering, erosion, 

landslides, and climatic variability), and disasters 

(earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, wildfires, 

floods, droughts, pandemics, and biological threats).

• Expertise related to the economic valuation of ecosystem services. 

• Expertise in developing techniques and models to 

characterize novel and emerging pathogens and 

contaminants. 

• Project teams with a broad range of scientific expertise 

that use interdisciplinary approaches.

2. National presence and infrastructure:

• A nationally distributed staff of scientists who collect 

environmental data with spatially and temporally consistent protocols.

• Databases that provide real-time and long-term 

environmental information and data ranging from 

local to national spatial scales.

• Internationally recognized research laboratories that 

develop and provide state-of-the-art methods to 

measure new and understudied disease agents. 

• The ability to conduct landscape-scale assessments 

across state and international boundaries.

3. Capabilities for data integration:

• Ability to synthesize spatially diverse environmental 

data with information on ecosystem characteristics, 

human demographics, and landscape changes.

• Ability to integrate and model environmental data 

on the causes and effects of environmental stressors, 

and compare outcomes of alternative management 

strategies.

• Ability to integrate research, data, and knowledge 

across a wide range of scales from investigation and 

monitoring at a site to development of approaches 

to apply remotely sensed data and mapping tools to 

environmental health threats across the Nation.

Highlight

Providing Information About Potential 

Exposures to Chemicals in Drinking Water

USGS provides data at national and regional scales on unregulated 

contaminants in sources of drinking water. The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency uses USGS data on the occurrence of these contaminants in water resources to fulfill part of the Safe Drinking Water 

Act requirements for determining whether specific contaminants 

should be regulated in drinking water from public water supplies. 

Local health officials and the public also use USGS data to make 

decisions about the use of drinking water from untreated domestic 

wells. Photograph courtesy of iStock Photographs. More information 

is available online at http://health.usgs.gov/dw_contaminants/.
Introduction 13

Future Challenges to Core Strengths and 

Capabilities

USGS will be challenged by rapid advances in scientific technologies, fundamental scientific understanding, 

and evolving interdisciplinary approaches to environmental health problems. The next decade will require close 

attention to maintaining a technically proficient workforce 

with skills in integrating interdisciplinary science. It will 

also require wise investments of resources in technologies 

that enable innovative approaches to the highest priority 

problems. Ultimately, it will require building capacity and 

mechanisms for delivering resource science that is timely, 

relevant, and adds value to decisionmaking. 

USGS will need increased capabilities and methodologies related to, genetics and genomics, modeling and risk 

analysis to understand the epidemiology of environmentally 

driven diseases. Understanding the factors that influence 

pathogens and contaminants of emerging concern will 

require increased expertise in atmospheric/meteorological 

processes, disease ecology, pathology, and bioinformatics. 

Taking full advantage of the newest capabilities in remote 

sensing will be essential. A complete understanding of the 

effects of contaminants and the interactions of multiple 

contaminants will require mechanistic understanding of the 

mode of action at the cellular, organismal, and population 

levels. Chemical and pharmacological modeling of fate 

and effects of biologically active contaminants will need to 

be integrated with models of physical processes that affect 

environmental transport. USGS also will be challenged 

with maintaining specialized laboratories to investigate 

emerging biohazardous agents that threaten environmental 

health and national security.

It will be essential for USGS to achieve the capabilities to anticipate and measure environmental contaminants 

at concentrations necessary to assess potential ecological 

and human health effects and guide pollution prevention, 

management, and mitigation actions. Perhaps the best 

example of this is the ability to analyze the impact of environmental contaminants measured at sub part-per-trillion 

levels—measurements that were not possible a decade ago. 

Measuring new substances that could potentially contaminate the environment, such as engineered nanomaterial, 

likely will require completely new technologies. Highthroughput tools for genetic characterizations will enable 

assessment of the wide combinations of disease agents that 

are potential environmental health threats. Similarly, use 

of in vitro bioassays to screen environmental samples for 

biological activity will be essential in identifying vulnerable environmental settings and priority contaminants. 

Broad application of such tools can indicate the biological 

mechanisms of action and potential adverse biological outcomes of specific chemicals or mixtures of chemicals found 

in the environment, and contaminated environmental media 

(water, sediment, or soil).

Highlight

USGS Laboratories Are OIE Collaborating 

Centre and Reference Laboratories

USGS laboratories provide specialized expertise to 

the international animal health community through 

collaboration with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), an international organization that 

enhances intergovernmental coordination on global 

disease incidents and facilitates safe trade of animals 

and animal products. A critical component of the OIE 

is its network of Collaborating Centres and Reference Laboratories–an elite group of institutions with 

specific animal health expertise. The USGS National 

Wildlife Health Center serves as an OIE Collaborating Centre for research and diagnosis of pathogens 

in wildlife. The USGS Western Fisheries Research 

Center is an OIE Reference Laboratory that provides 

international expertise on infectious haematopoietic necrosis (a viral disease) and bacterial kidney 

disease of fish. Photograph courtesy of Gail MoedeRogall, USGS. More information is available online at 

http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/ and http://wfrc.usgs.gov/.

Research into the infectious diseases of fish and wildlife 

requires specialized instrumentation and equipment in highly 

specialized laboratory settings. For USGS to continue to be a 

global leader in the field of environmental science, we must 

maintain our capabilities and stay abreast of new and innovative techniques and technologies. This means leveraging 

resources with government and university partners and making 

investments wisely to avoid duplication while targeting the 

highest priority science needs for the future.
14 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals

Identifying USGS Environmental Health Science 

Goals

This section describes five USGS environmental health 

science goals. These goals were identified by using the following criteria.

• Achieving the goal will address critical environmental 

health science knowledge gaps.

• The USGS has a well-defined role and the necessary 

interdisciplinary expertise to make a significant contribution to achieving the goal.

• Achieving the goal is realistic in terms of the state-ofscience, and will contribute substantially to safeguarding the health and prosperity of the Nation. 

• Each goal optimizes USGS opportunities to leverage 

robust partnerships with, and provide critical technical 

assistance to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers. 

• The combined goals must focus USGS science on the 

highest priority environmental health issues facing the 

Nation. 

The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the 

USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed 

with significant input from a broad range of stakeholders as 

well as from scientists and managers across USGS. 

Vision—USGS is a premier source of the environmental 

health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people. 

Mission—The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, 

natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers, who 

use that information to support sound decisionmaking. USGS 

will provide science to achieve the following societal goals:

• Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants 

and pathogens of emerging environmental concern.

• Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the 

environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, 

and people.

• Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated animals, and 

people. 

• Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions between, 

and combined effects of, exposure to contaminants and 

pathogens. 

• Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and 

anthropogenic disasters.

Highlight

Manufacturing Facilities Found to Release Pharmaceuticals into the Environment

USGS discovered that pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities can be a significant source of pharmaceuticals to 

aquatic environments. Effluents from two wastewater treatment plants that receive discharge from pharmaceutical 

manufacturing facilities had 10 to 1,000 times higher 

concentrations of pharmaceuticals than effluents from 

wastewater treatment plants across the Nation that do 

not receive pharmaceutical manufacturing facility discharge (Phillips and others, 2010). The drugs included a 

muscle relaxant, an opioid prescribed for pain relief and 

drug withdrawal, a stimulant prescribed for obesity, and 

a barbiturate. USGS has been investigating the sources, 

distribution, and effects of pharmaceuticals and other 

emerging contaminants since the late 1990’s. Photograph 

shows USGS hydrologic technicians sampling Hallocks 

Mill Brook, New York, downstream of the outfall of a 

wastewater treatment plant receiving discharge from 

a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant. Photograph 

courtesy of Patrick Phillips, USGS. Additional information 

is available online at http://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/

PMFs.html.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 15

Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science 

to address environmental health threats in a logical order 

from informing prevention and preparedness to supporting 

systematic management response to environmental health 

issues. The results from Goal 1 will be used to prioritize 

research conducted to address goals 2 and 3. Goals 2 and 

3 are intended to provide the systematic research, national 

assessment activities, and fundamental knowledge to 

determine effective, long-term management strategies. 

Goal 4 acknowledges the increasing biological complexity 

surrounding the understanding of the combined effects of 

exposure to contaminants and pathogens. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters 

can cause immediate and prolonged adverse health threats 

and add a significant additional complication in efforts to 

protect the health of the environment, fish and wildlife, 

domesticated animals, and people. The knowledge and 

understanding gained in achieving Goals 1 through 4 will 

be essential in preparing for and mitigating the adverse 

environmental impacts of disasters (Goal 5). The goals are 

not intended to be equal in terms of the level of resources 

invested; however, they each identify critical environmental 

health science needs. Goals 1 and 5 are rapid response preparatory goals. Goals 2, 3, and 4 are foundational goals and 

by nature larger in scope and level of resource investment.

Goal 1: Identify, Prioritize, and Detect 

Contaminants and Pathogens of Emerging 

Environmental Concern

Emergence of environmentally driven diseases constitute a critical and growing threat to environmental health—

including the health of fish, wildlife, and people. There 

is a growing consensus among the scientific and health 

communities that threats from emerging disease agents will 

continue to increase and that the health risks and economic 

vulnerability of our increasingly interconnected planet will 

grow.

Historically, scientists have relied on established monitoring programs to assess changes in the environmental 

conditions that affect environmentally driven disease—an 

approach that allows us to react to past changes, but leaves 

a significant scientific gap in the Nation’s ability to identify 

and anticipate emerging health threats. As the number of 

environmental health threats continues to grow and become 

increasingly complex, informed decisionmaking and early 

action will be critical for timely and cost-effective prevention and mitigation. 

Emerging infectious diseases can have devastating effects on wildlife conservation, such as white-nose 

syndrome (WNS) in bat populations in the United States. 

Other factors that reduce population resilience (such as the 

sub-lethal effects of contaminants and reductions in genetic 

diversity) further increase the vulnerability of free-ranging 

aquatic and terrestrial species to infectious pathogens. 

Consequently, diseases can no longer simply be regarded as 

natural regulators of wild populations; they now pose a serious threat to fish and wildlife conservation and an increasing 

challenge for natural resource management. The availability 

Highlight

Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus in the 

Great Lakes

Viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus (VHSV) is among 

the most important viral pathogens of finfish—causing losses in both freshwater and marine species. In 

2005–06, VHSV emerged in the Great Lakes Basin, causing a series of large fish kills. As of June 2011, the virus 

has been found in 31 species of fish from Lake Superior, 

Lake Huron, Lake Michigan, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, 

Lake Ontario, the Niagara, and St. Lawrence Rivers, 

and inland lakes in New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, and 

Ohio. Significant outbreaks affected muskellunge (Esox 

masquinongy), freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens), 

goby (Neogobius melanostomus), burbot (Lota lota), 

yellow perch (Perca flavescens), gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) and smallmouth bass (Micropterus 

dolomieu). Work by USGS scientists in collaboration with 

State, Federal and Canadian partners focuses on: developing improved diagnostic methods, determining methods for disinfection of eggs, testing for vertical (intra 

ovum) transmission, and using molecular tools to identify 

and track strains of the virus. Genetic sequence analysis 

of more than 100 VHSV isolates from 37 locations in the 

Great Lakes Basin revealed a very low level of genetic 

diversity consistent with a recent, single introduction 

of the virus to a naïve population of fish. Photograph 

courtesy of Andrew Noyes, New York Department of 

Environmental Conservation, shows gizzard shad mortality event, Lake Erie. Additional information is available 

online at http://wfrc.usgs.gov/fieldstations/hq/vhs.html.
16 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

of effective wildlife disease management tools is limited. The 

few options that do exist (such as population reduction, use of 

vaccines or other biologics, and environmental modification) 

are expensive, often lack any assurance of success, and can be 

environmentally unsound, as well as unpalatable to the general 

public. 

Most (60.3 percent) emerging diseases identified in the 

last century were zoonotic—caused by pathogens originating 

from animals or animal products. Furthermore 71.8 percent 

of these zoonotic events originated in wildlife species (Jones 

and others, 2008). In the 21st century, approaches to evaluate 

health risks will have to consider increasing human populations; expanding urban centers; increasing interaction among 

people, wildlife, and livestock; global change; and movement 

of humans, animals, and food products.

Emerging threats from non-native and novel infectious diseases are of particular concern because animal 

and human populations are less likely to have developed 

immunity to the pathogen. As illustrated by West Nile 

virus, the introduction of a non-native invasive pathogen 

into the United States can be difficult to control and can 

have severe ecological and economic impacts. Similarly, 

the H5N1 Asian strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) 

are examples of diseases that can spread rapidly across 

the globe, emphasizing the need for prediction, early 

detection, and rapid response when new diseases arise.

The identification of the emerging environmental 

contaminants that constitute significant ecological and 

human health concern requires determining (1) the 

levels at which exposure poses a health concern, and 

(2) whether there is risk of exposure at or above the 

levels of concern. Gathering knowledge on potential 

contaminants that are newly developed and have limited 

or no available data is extremely challenging. Our past 

experience with legacy contaminants, such as persistent 

organic pollutants, contaminants that associate with 

sediment, contaminants that enter large groundwater 

systems, and contaminants that do not exhibit predictable environmental behavior, has shown that once 

released into the environment, management, removal or 

remediation can be expensive and difficult, if not impossible. In many cases, however, the need for information 

is only recognized after a contaminant is observed in the 

environment or an adverse toxicologic effect is suspected. Therefore, a management approach that emphasizes recognition of potential environmental health 

concerns before use of a chemical, pollution prevention, 

and rapid response to discovery of emerging environmental contaminants is essential. The need for scientific 

information to support this management approach will 

only continue to grow in magnitude and complexity.

Our experience with pharmaceuticals and endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the environment has 

demonstrated the need for scientific vigilance regarding 

emerging environmental issues. The discovery of widespread occurrence of pharmaceuticals in the Nation’s 

streams (Kolpin and others, 2002) demonstrated that 

even chemicals that we use in very small amounts in our 

homes can enter the environment and warrant serious 

evaluation as a potential health concern. Furthermore, 

models that predict the occurrence of environmental 

contaminants are challenged by the complexities of 

source pathways and transport processes. For example, 

models of pharmaceuticals in the environment have not 

adequately addressed potential pharmaceutical losses 

from manufacturing facilities, land-applied biosolids, 

and use of pharmaceuticals in animal agriculture, and 

generally suffer from a lack of knowledge of transport 

behavior and degradation byproducts.

Highlight

Implications of New Fungicides in Streams

In a 5-year period (2004 to 2009), the application of fungicides increased from less than 2 percent to 25–30 percent 

of the 89 million hectares of corn, soybean, and wheat 

planted in the United States. Fungicides are also used on 

turf and a variety of fruit and vegetable crops, such as 

almonds, apples, grapes, lettuce, peanuts, potatoes, and 

tomatoes. The number of fungicides used has increased 

significantly since 2002. In a recent study, USGS scientists 

detected one or more fungicides, including azoxystrobin, 

metalaxyl, propiconazole, myclobutanil, and tebuconazole, 

in 20 of 29 U.S. streams sampled during 2005 and 2006 in 

areas where soybeans are grown. This was the first time 

that some of these fungicides were detected in the environment. Mixtures of fungicides were common. The potential 

impact of these fungicides on non-target organisms, such 

as the gut fungi of insects, is being investigated. This 

information is relied on to guide pesticide use practices and 

registrations. Photograph courtesy of Dana Kolpin, USGS, 

shows aerial spraying of fungicides in Iowa. More information is available online at http://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/

fungicides_streams.html.
Highlight

USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 17

Tracking Wild Birds and Avian Influenza

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI H5N1) can 

devastate wild bird populations and infect poultry and 

humans. The H5N1 virus continues to reemerge across 

much of Eurasia and Africa. Since 2003, HPAI H5N1 has 

killed more than 340 people, including 18 in 2010, and 

has led to the culling of more than 250 million domestic 

poultry. Although the disease is not efficiently transmitted between humans, public health officials worry that 

the H5N1 could mutate into a more transmissible form, 

possibly leading to a pandemic. The USGS and its partners have been using satellite telemetry to track movements of waterfowl and shorebirds within Asia (the likely 

source of HPAI H5N1), and conducting surveillance for 

the virus along migratory routes to the United States and 

within Alaska. This surveillance work improves our ability to assess the risk of HPAI H5N1 entering the United 

States and our chances of early detection. Photograph 

courtesy of John Takekawa, USGS, shows a bar-headed 

goose (Anser indicus) equipped with a miniaturized 

global positioning system (GPS) satellite transmitter 

being released in Koonthankulum Sanctuary, India.

Society is continually developing diverse new technologies and materials to enhance our way of life. These can 

include new forms of energy production, new methods of 

mineral and energy resource extraction, use of new materials in telecommunications and electronics, new approaches 

to food production, and the increasingly widespread development and use of nanomaterial. Many of these technologies may require increased consumption of new synthetic 

chemicals or exotic metals such as tellurium, gallium, and 

rare earth elements. The environmental behavior of many 

of these technologically important chemicals and metals are

poorly understood, and little is known about their potential 

toxicologic effects on humans and other organisms.

Priority Science Questions

• How do we identify emerging contaminants and 

pathogens that are likely to become environmental, 

ecological, and human health threats?

• What are the major sources of emerging contaminants or reservoirs of emerging pathogens, and how 

will they change in the future?

• What new classes of contaminants and (or) pathways of contamination to the environment will 

occur in the next decade?

• What is the risk of exposure to emerging contaminants and do we anticipate adverse biological 

outcomes?

• What factors promote the movement and establishment of new pathogens?

• Which host species and (or) regions are most at-risk 

of introduction of high-consequence diseases?

• Can sentinel organisms be used to provide an 

early warning of emerging environmentally driven 

diseases?

Strategic Science Actions

USGS will (1) prioritize contaminants and pathogens 

of emerging concern to guide research and management 

activities, (2) conduct surveillance and monitoring to 

provide early warning of emerging health threats, and (3) 

develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Information 

from these efforts will help focus the attention of the scientific community on the Nation’s highest priority emerging 

environmental health threats, and enable timely, proactive 

management action.

Strategic Science Action 1.—Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and 

management activities.

• Coordinate with other Federal agencies to develop 

methods for prioritizing pathogens and contaminants of 

emerging concern. Ensure information essential for prioritization is distributed widely among multiple Federal 

agencies. USGS will encourage, and where appropriate, 

lead efforts to integrate such information and apply it to 

effective prioritization based on the most likely potential health concerns. USGS will use this prioritization to 

develop measurement methods and field efforts to identify 
18 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

and monitor contaminants and pathogens of emerging 

concern. 

• Utilize knowledge of the chemical life cycles and other 

substances to identify point-source and nonpointsource pathways of release to the environment. Use 

this knowledge to inform the design of monitoring 

efforts intended to identify which contaminants enter 

the environment, the pathways to the environment 

that may be of significant concern, and the complex 

contaminant mixtures that may enter the environment 

via these pathways.

• Enhance USGS disease diagnostic capabilities to 

provide early detection of emerging environmentally 

driven diseases in aquatic and terrestrial organisms that 

will be used for systematic disease surveillance.

• Improve capabilities to conduct forensic studies to 

identify unknown contaminants and contaminant mixtures in various environmental samples to aid in the 

identification of contaminants that enter and persist in 

environmental media.

• Develop screening tools to test for the biological 

activity of contaminated environmental media, and 

work with other Federal agencies, including NIEHS 

and U.S. EPA, which are developing and applying 

high-throughput screening techniques to evaluate the 

biological activity of individual chemicals.

Strategic Science Action 2.—Conduct research, surveillance, 

and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health 

threats.

• Conduct surveillance and monitoring to establish 

baseline conditions of environmentally driven disease 

and disease agents, and measure trends; develop the 

needed measurement methods and field approaches; 

and rely on indicators to identify multiple sources and 

the associated mixtures of contaminants and pathogens 

in the environment.

• Develop and implement real-time monitoring and surveillance techniques that employ indicators of potential 

health threats and can be used specifically to provide 

early warning of rapid-onset threats, such as to drinking water or biosecurity.

• Utilize risk analysis, statistical, and epidemiological 

techniques to target surveillance and mitigation activities to the geographic areas and populations with the 

highest likelihood of disease emergence.

• Identify environmental contaminants of emerging 

concern by combining (1) environmental monitoring 

data, which define the concentrations and mixtures 

of contaminants to which ecosystems and people are 

exposed, and (2) the results of screening tools, which 

estimate biological activity of contaminants and contaminant mixtures.

Strategic Science Action 3.—Develop approaches and tools 

that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, 

and species.

• Develop models and other forecasting tools that identify emerging environmental health threats, vulnerable 

ecosystems, susceptible species, and pathways for 

human exposure. Models of contaminants will build 

upon existing knowledge of contaminant sources and 

the hydrologic, atmospheric, and geologic processes 

that affect the transport and fate of contaminants in 

the environment. Models of pathogens should build 

upon existing knowledge of disease reservoirs and the 

environmental factors that affect disease epidemiology 

and etiology.

• Provide decisionmakers and other stakeholders with 

access to the latest USGS information on emerging 

environmental health threats within the decision framework that the information is used and using bioinformatics to increase availability and usability.

Outcomes and Relevance

Prevention of environmentally driven disease (resulting 

from exposure to environmental contaminants and pathogens) 

is the ultimate desired outcome of the aforementioned USGS 

strategic science actions. However, agents of environmentally 

driven disease are often released into the environment before 

management actions can prevent that from happening. Therefore, the information and tools resulting from these actions 

also are intended to identify high-risk environmental settings 

and populations, to guide response activities, and to minimize 

environmentally driven disease. Environmental data on new 

or emerging environmental health threats, risk-analysis and 

disease-management tools, information on potential exposure 

pathways, and improved knowledge of pathogen reservoirs 

and contaminant sources are all essential to effective, proactive, preventive management strategies and will enable managers to prevent or minimize environmental contamination and 

respond rapidly to emerging diseases. 
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 19

Goal 2: Reduce the Impact of Contaminants 

on the Environment, Fish and Wildlife, 

Domesticated Animals, and People

Modern human societies produce large amounts of a 

diverse array of chemicals and other substances that are used 

in manufacturing, agriculture, medical treatment, transportation, construction, and other applications. There are many 

pathways by which contaminants can enter the environment 

(fig. 4). Some of these substances, such as fertilizers and 

pesticides, are intentionally released into the environment and 

can become problematic if improperly used or handled. Other 

chemicals or substances are released into the environment 

as byproducts of human activities and can be problematic, 

such as wastes from fossil fuel combustion, and numerous 

chemicals found in household products associated with treated 

wastewaters (for example detergents, fire retardants, and 

pharmaceuticals). Additional contaminants, such as metals, 

minerals, petroleum products, solvents, and other commercial or industrial substances, are not intended for release but 

nevertheless find their way into the environment because of 

unintended, accidental, or malicious releases. Finally, naturally 

occurring earth processes such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, erosion by wind and water, and chemical weathering 

of rocks also deliver mineral, chemical, and radionuclide 

contamination to the environment.

Many natural and anthropogenic contaminants can have 

toxic effects on individual organisms and adversely affect populations, ecosystems, and thus environmental health. Whether 

a particular contaminant is harmful to wildlife or human health 

depends on the contaminant’s chemical form, concentration, 

and toxicity in the environmental media (such as soils, water, 

or air) through which organisms are exposed. Other factors 

that influence the adverse effects of these contaminants include 

the susceptibility of individuals and the frequency and (or) 

duration of exposure to contaminated media (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008). Furthermore, the sensitivity 

of an organism to a contaminant can be significantly different 

at different life stages. Often, embryonic, prenatal, perinatal, 

or juvenile life stages are the most sensitive to contaminant 

exposures, which can affect development of individuals later 

in life as well as future generations. However, all life stages 

can include critical biological processes that can be disrupted 

by contaminant exposure. Thus, exposure histories of aquatic 

and terrestrial organisms as well as humans are an important 

part of identifying mechanisms of biological activity, susceptible life stages, and thresholds for adverse impacts.

The manner in which organisms are exposed to natural or 

anthropogenic contaminants depends on a spectrum of factors 

and processes. These factors include sources and loads of contaminants to the environment; the physical and biogeochemical mechanisms that transport the contaminants from the point 

Figure 4. Environmental contaminant source and transport pathways.

Stack

emissions Waste water

treatment plant

discharge

Cropland with 

applied pesticides, 

manure, biosolids 

and fertilizer

Residential 

leach and

septic

Industrial

discharges and

urban runoff

Mine and 

mineralized

rock drainage

Animal feeding 

operations

SEEPAGE SEEPAGE SEEPAGE

WATER TABLE WATER TABLE

WIND

WIND

RUNOFF

RUNOFF

RUNOFF
Highlight

20 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

of release to the point of exposure; the chemical speciation of life stages, when disruption of chemical signaling related 

the contaminant and resulting byproducts; and the contaminant to development can have significant impacts later in life 

mixtures found in the environment to which organisms are (Diamanti-Kandarakis and others, 2009). Additionally, it has 

exposed. been demonstrated that the effects of exposure to contaminant 

Our experience with endocrine-disrupting chemicals mixtures can be significantly different, and sometimes greater 

(EDCs) has demonstrated several new and important consid- than, the effects of exposure to individual contaminants (Brian 

erations for environmental contaminants; it has shown that and others, 2005), even when the level of each individual 

very low (sub part-per billion, ppb) concentrations of some contaminant is low. The U.S. EPA has adopted a new drinkingchemicals can cause significant adverse effects. While com- water strategy that addresses contaminants as groups rather 

mon knowledge indicated that adverse health effects occurred than one at a time to enhance drinking-water protection. The 

largely at concentrations above a ppb, exposure to potent new strategy focuses on contaminants in groups that have 

EDCs at concentrations that are 1,000 times lower can have similar health endpoints, and can be measured and treated 

adverse ecological health effects (Kidd and others, 2007). Our using the same methods and approaches (U.S. Environmental 

experience with EDCs also has reinforced the importance of Protection Agency, 2010).

the timing of exposure, especially in terms of sensitive, early 

Endocrine Disruption in Fish Populations

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are important environmental contaminants because they have the ability to interfere with normal function of the endocrine system, thus altering reproduction, development, and immune system integrity. 

EDCs include naturally occurring chemicals produced by animals (hormones) and plants (phytoestrogens), as well as 

synthetic hormones and other chemicals used in commercial products, household products, and in agriculture, which can 

mimic or block the function of natural hormones within an organism. USGS scientists have identified sources and occurrence of some EDCs in ground and surface waters across the Nation. USGS has also been investigating reproductive 

anomalies, such as intersex, in fish populations believed to be associated with EDCs. The graphic shows the occurrence of 

intersex in smallmouth bass (SMB), largemouth bass (LMB) and other fish across the Nation (Hinck and others, 2009). Targeted field investigations of 

endocrine disruption in fish 

continue in the Potomac 

River, Boulder Creek, Rio 

Grande, and other locations in the U.S. These field 

investigations document 

fish kills, reproductive 

anomalies (intersex), the 

cause-and-effect linkages 

between exposure to EDCs 

and endocrine disruption, 

and threshold concentrations of EDCs that affect 

fish populations. This 

science is being used by 

resource managers to minimize release of EDCs to the 

environment and to protect 

wildlife and human health. 

More information is available online at http://www.

cerc.usgs.gov/Assets/

UploadedFiles/ExternalDocs/bass_intersex-09-rev.

pdf.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 21

The USGS has a well-established role in characterizing 

the causes and mechanisms of environmental contamination, 

contaminant transport and fate, the effects of contaminants 

on aquatic and terrestrial organisms, and human exposure 

through various environmental media. The USGS frequently 

is asked to help public health scientists understand the nature 

and toxicologic implications of human exposures to environmental contaminants. As a result, the USGS is well positioned 

to address a variety of priority science questions that focus on 

the need to understand the linkages between sources of natural 

and anthropogenic contaminants, their physical, chemical, and 

toxicologic characteristics, exposure routes to organisms, and 

the susceptibility and sensitivity of organisms at different life 

stages.

Priority Science Questions

• What classes of natural and anthropogenic contaminants have the greatest long-term impact on environmental quality and the health of aquatic and terrestrial 

organisms and humans?

• What are the most important sources of contaminants 

to the environment, and what actions can be taken to 

mitigate environmental contamination? What contaminant mixtures are observed in common environmental 

settings, reflecting an integration of numerous disparate contaminant sources?

Anthropogenic Sources of Mercury and Methylmercury Identified in the North Pacific Ocean

• How does the chemical species or form of a contaminant and the associated properties influence its 

distribution and persistence in the environment, and its 

adverse health effects on exposed organisms?

• What environmental processes and factors influence 

the transport and fate of contaminants in the environment and the vulnerability of organisms to contaminant 

exposure?

• What are the modes of action of contaminants on vulnerable organisms, which contaminants have similar 

modes of action, and how will contaminants interact 

biologically?

• What are the acute and chronic thresholds for adverse 

health effects (both lethal and sublethal) in aquatic and 

terrestrial organisms for both individual contaminants 

and contaminant mixtures—including at sensitive life 

stages? How do we assess the potential impact of longterm low-level exposures?

• What biological outcomes (for example, behavioral, 

reproductive, and developmental) result from exposure 

of aquatic and terrestrial organisms to environmental 

contamination?

• What biological outcomes have population-level 

effects?

Highlight

About 40 percent of all mercury exposure experienced 

by U.S. citizens results from the consumption of fish from 

the Pacific Ocean. Until recently, it was believed that 

the primary mercury source was geologic, such as from 

deep-sea vents. A paradigm-changing study conducted 

by the USGS and its partners revealed the causal source 

is recent atmospheric mercury emissions. Mercury 

deposited to oceans settles to depths where it is converted to methylmercury, a highly toxic form of mercury 

that accumulates in food webs. These findings link 

contemporaneous sources to human exposure (consumable fish) and document how large water bodies can be 

far more responsive to changes in mercury loading than 

previously thought. The authors showed that mercury 

concentrations in the Pacific Ocean have increased by 

30 percent in the past 20 years, and estimated an additional 50 percent increase by 2050 if mercury emission 

rates continue as projected. Understanding the linkage 

between sources and exposure helps decisionmakers evaluate the trade-offs between human exposure and future emissions. The photograph, courtesy of William Landing, Florida State University, shows scientists on the vessel R/V Thomas G. 

Thompson (Office of Naval Research) lowering a “rosette” of 12 Niskin bottles to sample water at various ocean depths. 

Additional Information is available online at http://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/pacific_mercury.html.
22 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Strategic Science Actions

A strength of USGS environmental health activities is 

a basis in field studies that characterize the range of actual 

environmental conditions across numerous settings. USGS 

field-based studies are intended to identify both common and 

unusual circumstances. Often the most important environmental circumstances are not common or typical; however, they 

pose the most significant environmental health threat. USGS 

field-based studies provide a foundation upon which laboratory and modeling studies are designed and implemented to 

support and generalize results to other similar settings across 

the Nation. USGS will (1) systematically characterize the 

sources, occurrence, transport, and fate of environmental 

contaminants, (2) evaluate the threat of environmental contamination to the health of the environment, fish and wildlife, 

domesticated animals, and people, and (3) characterize potential human exposure.

Strategic Science Action 1.—Systematically characterize 

the sources, occurrence, transport, and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate 

contamination.

• Characterize the national occurrence and distribution 

of priority natural and anthropogenic contaminants in 

environmental settings that integrate numerous contaminant sources and a range of exposure pathways, 

including the quantification of contaminant mixtures 

in various environmental media (air, soil, dust, rock, 

surface water, sediment, and tissue) and in vulnerable 

species and at-risk human populations.

• Provide a national assessment of point, nonpoint, and 

natural contamination sources to the environment, 

which documents the contaminant mixtures and loads 

from various sources, and relates that information to 

environmental occurrence data. 

• Identify and quantify the physical and biogeochemical processes that affect the transport, transformation, 

and fate of environmental contaminants within aquatic 

environments, terrestrial environments, and the atmosphere.

• Develop contaminant occurrence and distribution models that integrate knowledge of contaminant sources, 

occurrence, properties, and transport processes to identify important environmental contaminants, quantify 

exposure pathways, determine how to mitigate contaminant releases to the environment, and determine 

how to manage existing contamination.

• Identify environmental settings and geographic areas 

that are particularly vulnerable to environmental contamination and identify vulnerable species and at-risk 

human populations associated with these settings. 

Strategic Science Action 2.—Evaluate the threat of environmental contamination to the health of the environment, fish 

and wildlife, domesticated animals, and people, and inform the 

associated management and protection efforts.

• Conduct coordinated field and laboratory studies that 

(1) define exposure routes through various environmental media, (2) define toxicity thresholds for 

individual contaminants and mixtures, and (3) identify 

Highlight

Pesticides and Risk to Fish Reproduction

USGS scientists found that atrazine, one of the most widely used pesticides in the Nation, reduced reproduction in fathead 

minnows by disrupting egg production (Tillitt and others, 2010). To estimate the risk that atrazine poses to native fish, USGS 

modeled annual maximum 21-day 

average concentrations of atrazine in surface water (Stone and 

others, 2008) to compare to fish 

toxicity thresholds. The resulting 

map identifies large regions of the 

country where the concentrations 

of atrazine in surface water are 

above the thresholds for reproductive effects in fish [less than 

0.5 micrograms per liter (μg/L) in 

blue; 0.5 to 5.0 μg/L in yellow; more 

than 5.0 μg/L in orange; gray is not 

modeled]. 

Estimated maximum 21-day 

moving-average concentration of atrazine, in 

micrograms per liter

Not modeled

< 0.5

0.5 - 5.0

> 5.0 - 50.0

> 50.0

EXPLANATION
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 23

critical life stages of contaminant exposure in vulnerable aquatic and terrestrial species.

• Characterize the potential additive, synergistic, 

antagonistic, and potentiating effects of contaminants 

commonly found to co-occur in the environment, and 

integrate this knowledge into assessments and models 

of susceptibility, vulnerability, and the range of anticipated biological outcomes for aquatic and terrestrial 

organisms.

• Identify frequently detected contaminants for which 

toxicity benchmarks are not available, and collaborate 

with partner agencies to prioritize the development of 

benchmarks for targeted contaminants.

• Construct models designed to predict the effects of 

contaminant exposure on populations of aquatic and 

terrestrial organisms.

Strategic Science Action 3.—Characterize potential human 

exposure to support establishment of health standards and 

contamination-reduction efforts.

• Define potential human exposures to contaminants 

for a range of exposure pathways, including drinking water, recreational water, inhalation and dermal 

contact with contaminated air, aerosols, dusts, soils and 

sediments, and selected foods. Support assessments of 

total exposure, and to prioritize efforts that will have 

the most significant impact on reducing total human 

exposure. 

• Quantify the performance of selected treatment 

technologies designed to reduce human exposure to 

contaminants, particularly drinking-water treatment 

technologies.

Outcomes and Relevance

These strategic science actions will provide new tools 

and fundamental knowledge for managing the release, mitigation, and remediation of the most significant environmental 

contamination problems facing the Nation in the next decade. 

An integrated understanding of contaminant sources, mobility, bioavailability, and physiological impacts will enable 

effective management actions that minimize contaminant 

releases and their adverse health effects. Specifically, these 

actions will (1) enable research to focus on the highest priority environmental contaminants, (2) inform management 

and regulatory actions that prevent or mitigate contaminant 

releases, (3) enable research and development to focus on 

the most needed improvements in treatment technologies 

and best management practices, (4) provide information that 

enables effective definition of water-quality criteria and other 

environmental health criteria, (5) enable wildlife conservation 

and ecosystem restoration activities to target the most vulnerable environmental settings and species, (6) enable wildlife 

scientists to better characterize and mitigate adverse health 

effects, and (7) provide public health managers with improved 

knowledge of human exposure to environmental contaminants. 

Providing this scientific information to government agencies, 

industry, and the public will be essential to overall efforts to 

safeguard the health of the environment. 

USGS scientists prepare to collect environmental samples at Orange Beach, 

Alabama following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Photograph by Lori Lewis, USGS.
Highlight

24 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Goal 3: Reduce the Impact of Pathogens on the 

Environment, Fish and Wildlife, Domesticated 

Animals, and People

Environmentally driven diseases caused by pathogens 

are an important cause of morbidity and mortality for all 

organisms. Understanding the factors that affect the distribution, transmission, and severity of these diseases is critical for 

mitigating population-level impacts on aquatic and terrestrial 

organisms. Changes in the distribution, patterns, or severity 

of established diseases can result from a variety of factors 

such as increased global trade and travel, agricultural and 

aquacultural practices, habitat loss, climate change, changes 

in host density, and the introduction of non-native species. Microbial and parasitic adaptation and evolution and 

changes in common environmental reservoirs (soil, dust, 

groundwater, and surface water) also affect disease spread 

and transmission. 

In the new paradigm of “One Health,” the United 

States and world health agencies have acknowledged that 

the health of humans, animals, and the environment are 

inextricably linked (American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008; World Health Organization, 2011). Perturbations in one can adversely affect the others, but there is 

a significant gap in our understanding of how changes 

in earth and environmental processes affect the health of 

animals and people. A variety of transmission pathways 

influence the occurrence and distribution of diseases among 

wildlife, domesticated animals, and people (fig. 5). Novel 

infectious diseases frequently occur first in wild populations; native fish and wildlife can act as reservoirs for 

pathogens in the environment that can then “spill over” 

into domesticated animals (for example, brucellosis or viral 

hemorrhagic septicemia) or humans (for example, bubonic 

plague). Alternatively, other diseases can “spill back” into 

wild populations from humans or domesticated animals (for 

example, tuberculosis). Infectious diseases are also important from a conservation perspective. They can impede 

ecosystem function (for example, WNS in bats, chytridiomycosis in amphibians, and aspergillus in corals) as well 

as the survival or recovery of threatened and endangered 

species (for example, canine distemper and sylvatic plague 

in black-footed ferrets).

This goal builds upon USGS expertise in ecologic, 

geologic, hydrologic, and anthropogenic factors influencing 

disease occurrence in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. 

USGS has ongoing research and valuable stores of data 

on key fish, wildlife, human, and ecological health issues 

including vector-borne and zoonotic diseases, water and 

airborne contaminants, and bioaccumulation of contaminants. USGS has specialized laboratory facilities and internationally recognized expertise in infectious diseases of 

fish and wildlife, as well as expertise in the occurrence and 

transport of pathogens by water and atmospheric particulates. Research is being done collaboratively with Federal, 

State, Tribal and non-profit organizations with interests in 

the health of native fish and wildlife, zoonotic diseases, 

and infectious diseases affecting domestic agriculture or 

aquaculture.

Priority Science Questions

• What environmental factors influence the occurrence and control the distribution, severity, and 

dynamics of wildlife diseases affecting free-ranging 

Brucellosis in Wildlife and Livestock

Brucellosis is a chronic bacterial disease in livestock 

and wildlife and is among the most common zoonotic 

infections worldwide. In the Greater Yellowstone 

Region, brucellosis was probably introduced from 

cattle to bison (Bison bison) prior to 1917. Yellowstone 

bison are one of the few genetically unaltered bison 

populations; however, since they are also infected 

by brucellosis, they cannot be used to establish new 

bison populations elsewhere. After over 70 years of 

control efforts, brucellosis is almost eradicated in 

cattle, and the Greater Yellowstone Region is the last 

reservoir of Brucella abortus in the United States. 

USGS researchers and partners in state agencies 

have found that brucellosis is increasing in prevalence in elk (Cervus elaphus) and expanding into new 

regions, increasing the potential for wildlife-livestock 

conflict. Reducing artificial feeding by 30 days may 

reduce brucellosis by around two-thirds. USGS 

researchers are working with managers on this strategy and alternative methods to reduce the prevalence 

of brucellosis in elk and bison. Photograph, courtesy 

of Paul Cross, USGS, shows elk congregating on the 

Camp Creek Feed Ground in northwestern Wyoming. 

More information is available online at http://www.

esajournals.org/doi/full/10.1890/06-1603.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 25

Figure 5. Infectious disease transmission pathways.

WILDLIFE WILDLIFE AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURE

AQUACULTURE AQUACULTURE

MOSQUITO-BORNE TICK-BORNE DIRECT WATER-BORNE

Crows

Ticks

Mice

Mosquitos

Chickens Deer

Native fish

Fish farm

Humans

Pigs

populations, and consequently, people and domesti- • What are the pathways, risk factors, and potential concated animals? trol strategies that affect transmission of diseases from 

aquatic and terrestrial wildlife reservoirs to agriculture • What environmental factors drive the evolution of and aquaculture, and vice versa? pathogens affecting aquatic and terrestrial species? 

• What are the exposure pathways, risk factors, and • In what ways are infectious diseases impacting the potential control strategies that affect transmission of health or recovery of threatened and endangered spe- infectious agents between wildlife and humans? cies, as well as the natural functioning of ecosystems?

Highlight

During 2006–2007, a disease of unknown origin, subsequently named “white-nose syndrome” (WNS) began 

devastating colonies of hibernating bats near Albany, New 

York. USGS and collaborators later determined that WNS 

is caused by a novel fungus (Geomyces destructans). This 

new disease spread rapidly throughout the Northeast 

and continues to move into the Midwest, Southeast, and 

provinces of Canada, often resulting in 100 percent mortality. Although WNS does not pose a direct threat to human 

health, bats are primary insect predators and can eat 

up to 1,200 mosquitoes in 1 hour. Many insects, such as 

mosquitoes, transmit diseases, such as West Nile virus, to 

humans and animals. Insect populations also affect agriculture and forestry. As a result, declining bat populations 

are likely to have significant economic impacts in terms of crop losses and increased pesticide use. Insectivorous bats in 

North America were estimated to be worth $22.9 billion per year to the agricultural industry due their diet of insect crop 

pests (Boyles and others, 2011). Why did WNS emerge in New York, and why is it so lethal to bats? Answers to these questions will be critical in controlling this disease as well as preventing the next emerging disease. The photograph, courtesy 

of Nancy Heaslip, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, shows little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus) hibernating in a cave in New York State. Most have the white fungal growth typical of WNS on their muzzles. More information is 

available online at http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/white-nose_syndrome/index.jsp.

White-Nose Syndrome in Bats
26 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Strategic Science Actions

A major focus of the activities conducted to achieve 

this goal will depend upon development of interdisciplinary 

teams capable of assessing the complexity of environmental 

and ecological factors that affect disease epidemiology and 

etiology. USGS will (1) determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases in natural 

populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential 

transmission to other animals and humans, (2) establish how 

natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the 

distribution and severity of infectious diseases in aquatic and 

terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals 

and humans, and (3) develop surveillance systems to identify 

changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic 

areas.

Strategic Science Action 1.—Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases 

in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and 

potential transmission to other animals and humans. 

• Establish how geologic, climatic, hydrologic, and 

atmospheric factors influence the distribution of 

hosts, reservoirs, and vectors.

• Characterize the role of vectors, predators, invasive 

species, and biodiversity in disease transmission. 

Determine the biotic factors that influence host 

response to infection and the associated epidemiological implications.

• Determine the abiotic factors that affect the distribution, viability, transmission, and pathogenicity 

of infectious agents in soil, water, dust, and other 

aerosols. 

• Determine the influence on disease of genetic drift 

due to host or geographic isolation, evolution of 

virulence in multihost and multipathogen systems, 

and barriers to host shifts. 

Strategic Science Action 2.—Establish how natural and 

anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential 

transmission to other animals and humans. 

• Conduct coordinated field and laboratory research 

on microbial diversity and the role of fish and wildlife as long-term carriers and reservoirs for disease, 

and investigate the impact of diseases on wildlife 

populations.

• Characterize the pathways, risk factors, and potential control strategies that affect the transmission of 

diseases among free-ranging fish and wildlife populations and domesticated animals, including contact 

patterns within and among species, nature of the 

reservoirs of infection, vector ecology, and developing methods of estimating transmission rates among 

different host species.

• Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes influence the distribution, viability, 

transmission, and replication rate of pathogens and 

the host immune response.

• Characterize multihost and multipathogen systems, 

including research to understand the factors that 

drive the evolution of pathogens and their virulence, 

and develop models for estimating contact patterns 

among host species.

Highlight

Reduction of Bacterial Kidney Disease 

(BKD) in Chinook Salmon

BKD, caused by Renibacterium salmoninarum, is a 

chronic, systemic disease of Pacific salmon transmitted both to progeny and through the water to 

nearby fish. BKD causes major losses in Federal, 

State and tribal hatcheries, and evidence indicates 

that juvenile anadromous salmonids may die of BKD 

upon their entry into seawater. The disease is especially detrimental to populations of Chinook salmon 

(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). It is difficult to control 

in hatcheries because effective vaccines do not exist 

and antibiotic therapy is only partially effective. The 

photograph, courtesy of Diane Elliott, USGS, shows 

a salmon with clinical signs of BKD. Most hatcheries 

rearing Pacific salmon have adopted aggressive programs for monitoring and controlling BKD. A standard 

hatchery practice for Chinook salmon is to screen 

female parents for the bacteria using an enzymelinked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) developed by 

USGS scientists, and to segregate or destroy progeny 

from female parents with high infection levels. This 

approach has proven to be a powerful tool for reducing 

BKD in the western United States, the Great Lakes, and 

elsewhere, resulting in increased survival of hatchery 

smolts before and after release, and a reduction in the 

potential impacts of BKD on wild salmonids in the same 

watersheds. More information is available online at 

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M09-044.1.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 27

Strategic Science Action 3.—Develop surveillance systems 

to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority 

geographic areas. 

• Develop methods to identify geographic areas, ecosystems, and species that are increasingly vulnerable to 

wildlife disease.

• Develop methods to identify likely points of cross 

transmission of disease from wildlife population to 

domesticated animals, and humans.

• Utilize these tools to design and improve disease 

surveillance systems that provide early warning of 

wildlife disease outbreaks and are capable of identifying risks associated with cross transmission of 

disease. 

Outcomes and Relevance

Wildlife and zoonotic diseases constitute a critical and 

growing threat to all species. Although the efforts of the aforementioned actions are based on a primary focus and expertise 

in wildlife disease, emphasis will be placed on the factors that 

affect transmission of diseases among free-ranging populations of aquatic and terrestrial animals, domesticated animals, 

and humans. Increasing direct interaction and collaboration 

with resource managers and health professionals responsible 

for protecting the health of wildlife, domesticated animals, and 

humans will improve our ability to provide needed expertise, 

knowledge, and tools. Interagency collaboration will increase 

efficiency and promote integration of efforts to better 

understand and prevent the risks of infectious 

diseases to natural populations of aquatic 

and terrestrial wildlife, domesticated 

animals, and humans.

Highlight

Effects of Plague on Wildlife May Have Been Underestimated

Sylvatic plague, a flea-borne bacterial disease, poses risks to both wildlife and human health. It is a major obstacle to 

recovery of the black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), one of the most critically endangered mammals in North America. 

Prairie dogs, which the ferret depends on for food, 

are highly susceptible to the disease and transmit it 

to the ferrets. Currently plague is controlled by annual 

large-scale insecticide application. USGS scientists 

and colleagues are testing the feasibility of vaccinating 

prairie dogs against plague. The vaccine, which is mixed 

with bait and placed in areas where the ferrets live, 

will provide better protection against plague with less 

labor, lower costs, and less risk of nontarget ecological 

impacts than insecticide application. The vaccine has 

great potential to improve recovery efforts for the blackfooted ferret and may assist in protecting public health 

by reducing the prevalence of the disease in parks and 

urban areas where the potential for human exposure 

is high. Photograph courtesy of R. Haggerty, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. Additional information is available 

online at http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/sylvatic_plague/index.jsp.

Black-tailed prairie dog. Photograph by 

Dean Biggins, USGS.
28 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Goal 4: Discover the Complex Interactions 

Between, and Combined Effects of, Exposure to 

Contaminants and Pathogens

Animals and people can be exposed to multiple classes 

of disease agents (contaminants and pathogens) from a variety 

of pathways. Scientists traditionally have studied the effects 

of individual disease agents or classes of disease agents—for 

example, the effects of a pathogen or the effects of exposure to 

a contaminant. We have begun to understand that concurrent 

exposure to different classes of disease agents can have significant interactions, thereby contributing to an overall adverse 

biological outcome. This complexity poses a unique challenge for the natural science and public health communities. 

Understanding the impacts of combined toxicologic and 

infectious disease agents will require assessing biological 

outcomes mechanistically to determine the relative contributions of each agent. 

Exposure to environmental contaminants may play a 

contributing role in significant wildlife declines, such as 

bee colony collapse disorder (CCD) and amphibian malformations. Although it is unlikely that chemical contaminants 

are solely responsible, it is possible that the adverse effects 

of contaminants could make organisms more susceptible to 

infectious disease or other stressors. A report by the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) Colony Collapse Disease Steering Committee (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

2010) stated, 

“Colonies with poor health, including colonies 

with CCD symptoms, exhibited increased pathogen levels and evidence of pesticide residues ...

Findings currently suggest an association of 

sub-lethal effects of pesticides with CCD. ... The 

emerging evidence of pesticide exposure to pollinators and potential interactive effects indicates the 

need to further study pesticides for their potential 

interactions with CCD.” 

Contaminants can impact the immune systems of 

organisms, making them vulnerable to pathogens. Immunosuppression caused at least in part by chemical exposures in 

the environment has been suggested as a potential contributing cause of massive fish die-offs in the Potomac River 

drainage (Blazer and others, 2010). The authors stated, 

“stressors include high helminth and myxozoan 

parasite loads, possibly as a consequence of 

high nutrient loads and/or immunosuppression; 

contaminant exposure, particularly to estrogenic compounds and complex mixtures; and 

other water quality factors, such as high pH and 

increased mean temperature.” 

The release of antimicrobial compounds to the environment raises significant implications for the interaction of 

contaminants and pathogens. Antimicrobials are designed 

to kill bacteria; when they are released into the environment, antimicrobials can adversely affect indigenous 

microbes and ultimately can contribute to the development 

of antimicrobial resistance. The release of antibiotics or 

antibiotic-resistant microorganisms to the natural environment can increase the development of, and exposure 

to, antimicrobial resistant pathogens. The Government 

Accountability Office (Government Accountability Office, 

2011) stated, 

“Scientific evidence gathered in our literature 

review shows that, at certain concentration levels, 

antibiotics present in the environment—in water 

and soil—can increase the population of resistant 

bacteria, due to selective pressure.”

Highlight

Endocrine Disruption of Immune Function 

in Fish

The growing prevalence of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in the environment is a global issue and 

may affect fish, wildlife, and humans. The dysfunction 

that can result from exposure to EDCs may manifest as 

reduced reproduction, modified sexual characteristics, 

immunosuppression, altered development, or a host of 

other maladies that subsequently can affect the health 

of native species. USGS scientists are conducting 

research into the immune dysfunction in fish caused by 

EDCs that may be responsible for a number of fish kills 

and disease outbreaks. USGS laboratory investigations 

use both native and model species of fish to understand 

mechanisms leading to compromised immune function. 

In addition, USGS scientists are developing diagnostic 

physiological, biochemical, and molecular indicators of 

EDC-induced immune dysfunction. Photograph, courtesy 

George Sanders, USGS, shows zebrafish (Danio rerio) 

used by USGS scientists to study the effects of EDCs on 

the fish immune system.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 29

The development and (or) spread of antimicrobial 

resistance through the natural environment raises significant implications for the management of human antibiotics 

released via household, commercial, and industrial wastes, 

and the use of veterinary antibiotics in livestock production.

This goal focuses primarily on understanding the 

dynamics between the effects of exposure to environmental contaminants and pathogens. However, many other 

environmental stressors (for example, habitat loss, changes 

in water quality, temperature and climate, run-off from 

resource extraction, flooding, and presence of non-native 

invasive species) must also be considered when managing 

the effects of stressors on fish and wildlife populations, as 

well as on local human populations. There is increasing 

awareness that environmental stressors, which may have 

little direct effect on the health of fish and wildlife populations, are capable of causing substantial indirect effects. 

These indirect effects may be hard to predict—resulting in 

what Paine and others (1998) called “ecological surprises.” 

For example, as in the case of amphibian deformities, 

where nutrient runoff into waterways can result in changes 

to water quality and eutrophication (Johnson and others, 

2007), which may not directly affect the health of organisms, but can serve as catalysts for other processes that do. 

Priority Science Questions

• What are the biological outcomes in aquatic and 

terrestrial organisms resulting from exposure to a 

combination of contaminants and pathogens? 

• What are the mechanisms of interaction among 

combinations of contaminants and pathogens?

• What are the highest priority combinations of contaminants and pathogens with the greatest potential 

to impact aquatic and terrestrial organisms and 

people, and the geographic areas and environmental 

settings where they are most likely to occur?

• How do we identify the relative contributions of 

combinations of contaminants and pathogens to 

adverse health outcomes?

• How do exposures to combinations of contaminants 

and pathogens affect the susceptibility of aquatic 

and terrestrial organisms to other environmental 

stressors?

• What metrics should be used to document and 

assess the impacts of combinations of 

contaminants and pathogens? 

Highlight

Antimicrobial Resistance in the Natural 

Environment

Antimicrobials, such as antibiotics used for human and 

animal health, have been detected in aquatic and terrestrial environments, largely as a result of release via 

wastewater discharges, and use in animal agriculture 

and aquaculture. To explore the potential spread of 

antimicrobial resistance from veterinary use of antibiotics, USGS surveyed tetracycline and sulfonamide 

antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) in waste lagoons 

in varied livestock operations (McKinney and others, 

2010). In all lagoons, sulfonamide ARGs were observed 

to be generally more recalcitrant than tetracycline 

ARGs. It was found that layer chicken farms had the 

lowest concentrations of both tetracycline and sulfonamide ARGs and low total antibiotic concentrations. 

Sulfonamide ARGs were highest in swine lagoons, 

which generally corresponded to the highest total antibiotic concentrations. This study provides insight into 

potential options for managing antimicrobials and antibiotic resistance emanating from agricultural activities, 

and for evaluating potential threats to the continued 

effectiveness of animal and human drug therapies. 

Photograph courtesy of Lisa Fogarty, USGS, shows 

USGS scientist analyzing bacterial DNA extracted from 

water samples.

Waste lagoon in Georgia. Photograph courtesy of Natural 

Resources Conservation Service.
30 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Demonstration wetland at Henderson, Nevada, where vegetated 

hummocks were built into the wastewater treatment wetland to 

improve its effectiveness and sustainability, as well as provide 

quality wildlife habitat. Photograph by Joan S. Daniels, USGS.

Strategic Science Actions

Strategic science actions to address Goal 4 will require 

integration of expertise that is not traditionally brought 

together in environmental studies. In order to achieve the 

objectives, the USGS will (1) identify how exposure to one 

class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make 

an organism more susceptible to adverse effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents, and (2) implement 

interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of the 

combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants.

Strategic Science Action 1.—Identify how exposure to one 

class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make 

an organism more susceptible to exposure to the other class of 

disease agents.

• Identify environmentally driven diseases and disease 

agents that have biological outcomes that result in 

increased susceptibility to the other class of disease 

agents. 

• Focus toxicological studies on determining the thresholds of effects of one disease that may affect susceptibility to another disease and define the exposure and 

life history scenarios needed to predict and mitigate 

impacts.

• Identify the disease agents with the greatest potential 

to increase susceptibility of disease in aquatic and terrestrial organisms. 

• Identify and characterize the biological mechanisms by 

which organisms that are affected by one class of disease agents become more susceptible to the other class 

of disease agents. Determine how interactions among 

diseases can be modulated by immune or other biological system functions, and whether such interactions 

rise to a level of having population-level consequences.

Strategic Science Action 2.—Implement interdisciplinary 

studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to 

pathogens and contaminants.

• Establish interdisciplinary teams of scientists with 

crosscutting expertise that can integrate analytical, 

experimental, and modeling approaches from different 

disciplines to provide scientific tools and fundamental information essential for use in a comprehensive 

approach to protecting wildlife health from the combined effects of multiple classes of disease agents.

• Integrate the occurrence of environmentally driven 

diseases into an assessment of vulnerability to other 

classes of disease to which they could contribute.

• Develop models that identify environmental settings 

and species that are vulnerable to combinations of 

contaminants and pathogens. Anticipate and forecast 

risk from novel combinations of contaminants and 

pathogens. 

• Utilize knowledge gained about the impacts of multiple classes of disease agents on wildlife to identify potential human-health issues associated with 

interaction of multiple classes of disease agents. For 

example, because of the similarity of the endocrine 

system across vertebrate animals, aquatic and terrestrial wildlife can provide a means to identify potential 

contaminant-induced vulnerabilities to pathogenic 

disease agents in humans, such as suppressed immune 

function.

Outcomes and Relevance

The aforementioned strategic science actions will 

enhance the understanding of the effects of exposure to complex combinations of disease agents, help explain heretofore 

incompletely explained disease, and help to more accurately 

quantify the individual impacts of different disease agents on 

the health of aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Resource managers will use this knowledge to identify vulnerable populations and diagnose and respond to disease outbreaks that may 

not be fully explained by our understanding of the effects of 

single classes of disease agents.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 31

Goal 5: Prepare for and Respond to the 

Environmental Impacts and Related Health 

Threats of Natural and Anthropogenic Disasters

The environmental and related health impacts of disasters 

have long been recognized, but are understandably overshadowed by the more visible physical impacts of the disasters and 

the resulting casualties. However, natural and anthropogenic 

disasters (for example, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, 

droughts, fires, industrial accidents, oil spills, acts of terrorism, and pandemics) pose significant immediate and long-term 

threats to the environment, and as a result, to the health of 

humans and other organisms. Increasingly, the public and the 

media are recognizing the environmental health implications 

of disasters, particularly their potential to affect public health, 

animal health, quality of life, the economy, and national 

security. Helping communities and natural resource managers 

prepare for, respond to, and recover from environmental health 

impacts of disasters is, therefore, an increasingly important 

component of disaster resilience. Achieving this goal requires 

preparedness by using lessons learned from previous disasters 

and the capability for rapid and immediate response to disaster 

in order to prevent catastrophic losses, including economic 

losses.

A disaster event can be a catalyst that leads to release 

of potentially hazardous materials containing contaminants 

or pathogens into the environment. Some examples include 

mobilization and dispersal of contaminants as a result of 

hurricane wave action, leaking of radiation after earthquake 

damage to a nuclear reactor, or release of contaminants or 

pathogens from a wastewater treatment plant due to flooding. 

Environmental health threats also can occur when the disaster 

event results in environmental conditions that can promote 

infectious disease outbreaks such as cholera or dengue fever. 

USGS has made significant contributions toward understanding the immediate and long-term environmental and humanhealth effects of disasters, including the World Trade Center 

catastrophe, Hurricane Katrina, and wildfires (Plumlee, 

2009). Similarly, USGS has made significant contributions 

to understanding the impacts of disasters on the environment 

and fish and wildlife health, including the Deepwater Horizon 

Oil Spill, and the impacts of strategies for managing the spill 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2012a). USGS also provides critical 

information needed for developing restoration strategies after 

a disaster. 

There is a clear and expanding role for the USGS in 

responding to emerging disease threats related to bioterrorism, 

as well as naturally occurring pandemic disease outbreaks. 

Wildlife morbidity and mortality events can serve as early 

warning systems for detecting human-health threats associated with bioterrorism and natural pandemics. Most of the 

disease agents that could be used for bioterrorism listed in 

the National Select Agent Registry (Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011) can affect and (or) be transmitted by wildlife 

species. Engagement and collaboration with other DOI 

agencies, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Health and Human 

Services, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and others is 

critical to effectively prepare for and respond to these types of 

threats. 

The USGS role in environmental health disaster response 

and preparedness is to provide impartial interdisciplinary 

research, data, and interpretations on disaster-related health 

issues including the sources, distribution, fate, and impacts of 

contaminants and pathogens. The USGS contributes specialized expertise in wildlife pathology, toxicology, epidemiology, 

environmental monitoring, and wildlife disease surveillance. 

In addition, USGS has specialized diagnostic and experimental research laboratories, including those that are certified for 

working with selected disease agents. USGS has an extensive 

mix of expertise, data, and technologies across its mission 

areas that can be brought together to improve understanding 

of the implications of disasters on ecological, human, and 

animal health. To fully leverage its environmental health science capability, USGS must collaborate with external experts 

in emergency response, public health and safety, homeland 

security, law enforcement, and ecosystem and animal health 

(both agriculture and aquaculture).

Priority Science Questions

• What types of hazardous materials can be released to, 

or mobilized in, the environment from various types 

of disasters? What are the associated ecological and 

human health threats? 

• How does the environmental disruption associated 

with disasters influence the emergence, incidence, 

and distribution of infectious diseases?

• How can we prepare and monitor for, and rapidly 

respond to, pandemic outbreaks or acts of 

bioterrorism?

• How can the environmental and health impacts of past 

disasters be measured and interpreted to help anticipate plausible environmental health impacts of future 

disasters?

• What are the economic costs associated with the 

environmental health impacts of disasters? What are 

the costs as compared to benefits of alternative 

management strategies?

Strategic Science Actions

Natural and anthropogenic disasters are dynamic events 

that can cause significant environmental disruption and 

health risk. They require prompt investigation in order to 

define their immediate and enduring environmental health 
32 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

risks. The USGS will (1) establish a formal interdisciplinary 

science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health 

risks associated with disasters, and (2) enhance methods to 

anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental health 

impacts of future disasters.

Strategic Science Action 1.—Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental 

health risks associated with disasters. 

• Establish a capability for rapid assessment of shortand long-term impacts of disasters on the environment, 

wildlife, and human health. These assessments will 

characterize changes in the environmental distribution of hazardous materials and pathogens produced 

by disasters, assess the potential for increased 

exposure, and explore the use of remote sensing to 

map the characteristics of disease agents within and 

away from disaster areas.

• Work with other Federal agencies to conduct 

interdisciplinary investigations of environmentally 

driven diseases that result from disasters, including changes in wildlife zoonotic diseases and the 

adverse impacts of hazardous materials. Assist 

resource managers in utilizing this information to 

develop management strategies.

• Promptly gather and release preliminary data and 

interpretations to emergency responders, disaster 

planners, and other decisionmakers in a timely and 

useful context to aid in disaster recovery.

• Improve and expand capabilities to measure and 

anticipate the economic and social implications of 

environmental disasters.

Strategic Science Action 2.—Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental and related 

health impacts of future disasters.

• Enhance real-time capabilities to warn of associated 

environmental health risks as disasters are happening. 

• Gather new baseline data in areas identified as high 

risk for types of disasters and the associated environmental health concerns, and develop methods 

to reconstruct pre-disaster environmental baseline 

conditions, by using knowledge of current environmental conditions and lessons learned from previous disasters. 

• Enhance methods, including predictive models and 

scenario development exercises, to anticipate and 

prepare for environmental, ecological, and related 

health impacts of future disasters. Work with USGS 

natural hazards experts to contribute environmental 

and ecological hazards components to multihazards 

disaster scenarios, such as the ARkStorm, New 

Madrid earthquake, and Great Southern California 

ShakeOut earthquake scenarios (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 2012b).

Highlight

Responding to Recent Wildfires and Their 

Potential Environmental Health Risks

Response to 

wildfires must 

consider both 

the dangers of 

the advancing 

fire as well as 

long-term environmental health 

concerns. USGS 

fire response 

includes helping 

to evaluate the 

environmental 

and human-health risks associated with exposure to airfall 

ash, residual ash, burned soils, and dusts generated from 

burned areas. For two recent wildfires—the 2009 Station 

Fire near Los Angeles, California, and the 2010 Fourmile 

Canyon Fire in the foothills above Boulder, Colorado—

samples of ash, soils, and debris were tested for contaminants and remote sensing measurements were used to 

extend results to unsampled areas. The photograph, courtesy of Gregg Swayze, USGS, shows scientists collecting 

samples of ash and burned soil after the 2010 Fourmile 

Canyon Fire. For fires such as these, which occur at the 

wild land/urban interface, it is essential to know the types 

of contaminants released from burned homes and structures, and their dispersal patterns in air, runoff, and rivers. 

USGS studies are identifying the products of combusted 

toxicants in building materials, with resulting implications 

for public health. More information is available online at 

http://health.usgs.gov/geohealth/v08_n02.html#c05.
USGS Environmental Health Science Vision, Mission, and Goals 33

Outcomes and Relevance

An important outcome of this goal will be the development of a coordinated Bureau-wide, rapid-response capability to characterize the full range of short- and long-term 

environmental health impacts of disasters, and to support 

the reduction of risk of adverse ecological and human health 

effects. These efforts are intended to integrate USGS expertise 

in environment and wildlife health with USGS capabilities 

in preparation for and response to disasters, and provide that 

expertise to agencies with the primary responsibility for disaster response. By collaborating with other experts in environmental health and the agencies with primary responsibility for 

responding to disasters, USGS provides science that improves 

our ability to anticipate and respond to environmental health 

threats associated with disasters and to minimize the adverse 

effects on the environment, fish and wildlife, domesticated 

animals, and people. 

The USGS plays an integral role in preparing for and responding 

to wildfires by providing tools and information before, during, 

and after the disasters to identify wildfire risks and reduce 

subsequent hazards, while providing real-time firefighting 

support during the events. Photograph of Squirrel Creek fire, 

Wyoming, July 2012, by Laura L. Hallberg, USGS.
34 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

A Strategy for Communicating Science to Society

This strategy is built upon the premise that USGS activities are integrated within an adaptive management framework; 

the role of USGS within this framework is to provide continual improvements in scientific knowledge and tools that are 

used directly to guide recurring and incremental improvements 

in environmental health management and protection (fig. 3). 

Communication with partners and stakeholders regarding science needs is essential for successful implementation of this 

strategy. USGS is widely acknowledged as a source of highquality, objective, and unbiased scientific information; however, the best science has limited utility unless it is effectively 

disseminated and used to inform the highest priority decisions.

Keys to successful communication include: (1) increasing 

awareness of USGS as a source of environmental health science; (2) engaging stakeholders from the onset in identifying 

priorities and goals; (3) coordinating with partners to increase 

synergies and make the best use of available resources; (4) 

delivering a synthesis of environmental health science information and tools from across the USGS in effective, useful, 

and useable formats; and (5) continuing to work with stakeholders through the decisionmaking process to explain the 

implications of the available science. Maintaining a lasting, 

iterative exchange of priorities and knowledge with stakeholders will require formal and committed communication.

USGS must promote communication among those who 

develop the scientific information, (including both USGS 

scientists and partners), and managers, policy makers, industry, and the public. This is particularly important in improving 

communication among scientists involved in earth sciences, 

wildlife and animal health, and public health. The National 

Research Council on Research Priorities for Earth Science and 

Public Health stated,

“Although valuable linkages do currently exist 

between the earth science and public health communities, the limited extent of interdisciplinary cooperation has restricted the ability of scientists and 

public health workers to solve a range of complex 

environmental health problems, with the result that 

the considerable knowledge at the interface of earth 

science and public health has been only partially 

realized” (National Research Council, 2007).

The need for effective and broad-ranging internal communication within USGS will only increase as national and 

international environmental health challenges require a wider 

range of scientific expertise. This communication strategy 

requires that scientists from across the USGS coordinate their 

activities, broadly advance the state of environmental health 

science, and develop technologies and tools that integrate 

science of varied disciplines to assist management actions.

Strategic Actions

Access to, and awareness of, USGS environmental health 

science contributions will be increased by actions that consolidate and deliver health-related information to stakeholders in 

a timely manner. A USGS environmental health science web 

page will provide a portal to all USGS environmental health 

Highlight

United States-Mexico Border Health Initiative and Environmental Health-Risk Assessment 

Along the Upper Santa Cruz River

The primary objective of the USGS Border Environmental Health Initiative (BEHI) 

is to provide data in support of environmental health decisionmaking by public 

health officials, resource managers, and concerned citizens. One focus is the 

study of inadequate water quantity and quality caused in large part by extreme 

human population growth in the dry regions of the United States–Mexico border. 

The Upper Santa Cruz River, located on the Arizona–Sonora border, is important 

for its cultural, historical, and ecological value. The river supports a high diversity 

of plants and animals, but it also sustains human communities by replenishing 

groundwater, a primary regional water source. Researchers involved in the USGS 

BEHI are developing a water quantity and quality model for the Santa Cruz watershed and investigating potential bioaccumulation of contaminants in the food web. 

The model can be used to analyze various land use and wastewater management 

scenarios. The photograph, courtesy of Hans Huth, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Border Environmental Protection, was taken Nov. 1, 2010, at the point of discharge of Nogales Wash to the Santa Cruz River, Arizona, and 

shows a public warning of water pollution. More information on the United States-Mexico BEHI is available online at http://

borderhealth.cr.usgs.gov/projectindex.html.
A Strategy for Communicating Science to Society 35

science information. Developing clear and objective messages about environmental and health threats will be aided by 

consultation with risk communication specialists, especially 

regarding communicating peer-reviewed findings in the face of 

scientific uncertainty. The USGS GeoHealth Newsletter (U.S. 

Geological Survey, 2012c) will widely disseminate USGS 

environmental health science findings. USGS podcasts—available on the USGS CoreCast web site (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2011)—will help communicate new findings and activities to 

stakeholders. In addition to traditional communication tools, 

new social media tools will be particularly useful for delivering time-sensitive and high-visibility findings, and communicating with a generation that relies heavily on social media for 

information. Social media and other emerging technologies 

can promote environmental awareness among the general 

public and enable the infusion of new ideas into our cultural 

fabric. Together, these measures will be especially useful for 

raising public awareness regarding actions that the public can 

take to safeguard the environment. Increasing our youths’ 

awareness of the importance of environmental health science 

to societal goals will enhance enthusiasm in the next generation for protecting the environment and improving our future. 

USGS will use social media and other emerging technologies 

to engage students in these issues and recruit the next generation of passionate young scientists.

Effective coordination with managers and policy makers to identify science priorities will be aided by a USGS 

Environmental Health Liaison Committee. This committee 

will enhance the flow of information from stakeholders to 

USGS science planning. It also will improve collaboration 

with partners to achieve synergies and make the most of 

existing resources. It will supplement active participation in 

Federal interagency committees on the environment, such 

as the National Science and Technology Council’s Committees on Environment, Natural Resources and Sustainability, 

and Homeland and National Security (Office of Science and 

Technology Policy, 2011), and the Institute of Medicine’s 

Roundtable on Environment, Health Sciences, Research, and 

Medicine (Institute of Medicine, 2011). The Environmental 

Health Liaison Committee will facilitate dialogue between 

scientists and managers that brings together their expertise, 

strengths, and perspectives. This dialogue will help to identify 

priorities, relate scientific information to manage decisions, 

and map next steps. Similarly, periodic environmental health 

conferences, such as recent USGS conferences targeting linkages with the public health community (Buxton and others, 

2008), will foster collaboration with our partners and communication with stakeholders. Steps will be taken to increase 

USGS participation in conferences of the environmental and 

public health communities to increase awareness of USGS as 

a resource.

Coordination of science activities within USGS will be 

aided by a framework for synthesizing USGS environmental 

health science information from across the Bureau. The framework will link databases that have relevance to environmental health decisionmaking and facilitate consideration of all 

relevant data regardless of source. The framework will include 

networking among scientists from diverse programs and 

organizational entities across the Bureau. The framework will 

be enhanced by use of modern informatics, geographic, and 

mapping technologies to improve USGS data and information 

integration, accessibility, and dissemination.

Outcomes

The causes of newly discovered environmental health 

threats are often uncertain. The environmental data required 

to address the problem are frequently incomplete or unavailable. There is also a lack of available information necessary 

to anticipate and respond to emerging environmental health 

threats. As a result, decisionmakers often are left to integrate disparate threads of scientific evidence into a coherent 

understanding upon which scientifically and socially defensible decisions can be based. Through implementation of this 

strategy, the USGS will create, analyze, interpret, and manage 

environmental health data. The USGS will provide knowledge 

and information to decisionmakers in a manner that is easy 

to access, easy to use, and where appropriate, in real time. 

The USGS will aid in the application of science to management decisionmaking. Delivery of such information enhances 

the Nation’s ability to prevent and mitigate future threats and 

take effective management actions to manage and minimize 

documented threats.

The United States-Mexico border fence cuts through a forest 

of saguaro cactus on the Sonora Mexico and Arizona border, 

2012. Photograph courtesy of Jack William Dykinga, ©Dykinga 

Photography.
36 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Integrating Science Across USGS

The Environmental Health Science Strategy presents 

plans for research and development activities intended to identify emerging and other priority environmental health issues 

and provide information and tools to improve management 

responses to those issues. The USGS will synthesize and interpret a wide range of environmental information from across 

the Bureau and focus it on a broad spectrum of environmental 

health issues. One priority in implementing this strategy is to 

provide a point of access to all environmental health science 

within the Bureau. Overlap and coordination among this 

science strategy and the other six USGS science strategies is inevitable and essential. Scientific information 

collected to meet the goals of one strategy is inherently 

applicable to the goals of other science strategies. 

The research and development activities outlined 

in this strategy rely on broad national characterizations 

of background or baseline (pre-impact) environmental 

conditions and environmental stressors provided by 

companion USGS science strategies. The Water, Ecosystems, Energy and Mineral Resources, and Core Science 

Systems Science Strategies will provide information 

from significant environmental monitoring and assessment studies. The Climate and Land Use Change, Natural Hazards, and Energy and Mineral Resources Science 

Strategies will provide information on the nature of 

other environmental stressors. 

The Environmental Health Science Strategy will 

support the activities of the other six science strategies by providing new and innovative tools, as well as 

broad fundamental understanding of disease outbreaks, 

environmental life cycle of anthropogenic and natural 

contaminants, ecology of pathogens that cause infectious diseases, and potential measures for preventing or 

mitigating exposure pathways and disease. Collectively, 

implementation of the seven USGS science strategies 

will allow the coordination of research activities, the 

sharing of expertise and information, and the coordination of efforts to put scientific information and tools into 

the hands of decisionmakers. The following sections 

describe examples of complementary activities with 

other USGS mission areas.

Climate and Land Use Change—Global change affects 

environmental conditions that determine the distribution 

of contaminants and pathogens, ecological and human 

exposures, the severity with which they might cause 

disease, and their ultimate fate. These environmental 

effects include changes in the distribution of pathogens, 

their hosts, and vectors caused by changes in habitat; 

the effects of changes in temperature and seasonality 

on disease resistance in fish, reptiles, and amphibians; 

increases in contaminant loads and pathogen abundance; 

changes in the number and severity of extreme weather 

events; and increases in windborne contaminant and 

pathogen exposure pathways. The varied impacts of 

global change will also influence the susceptibility of 

aquatic and terrestrial organisms to other environmental 

stresses, making those impacts an essential consideration in the multiple stressors that could be affecting the 

health of the environment. Knowledge of the environmental effects of climate and land use change gained by 

implementation of the Global Change Science Strategy 

will be essential for comprehensive environmental 

Highlight

Uranium Production and Environmental 

Health

Re-evaluation of nuclear energy as a viable alternative 

energy source may have a significant impact on uranium 

production in the United States. Nuclear energy provides 

about 20 percent of U.S. electricity from 104 nuclear power 

plants; the U.S. is the largest producer of nuclear-sourced 

electricity in the world. Approximately 3.9 million pounds 

of uranium were mined in the U.S. in 2008; however, about 

51 million pounds were consumed. Foreign sources and U.S. 

utility inventories supplied the difference. Informed decisions regarding future sources of nuclear resources in the 

U.S., as well as an effective means of resource extraction 

will be aided by an understanding of the potential environmental impacts of domestic production. USGS scientists 

with knowledge of extraction practices, the geochemistry of 

uranium deposits, the processes that affect environmental 

transport, and the pathways of exposure and ecotoxicity 

for uranium and its radionuclides, are working together to 

provide information to resource managers and industry that 

will minimize the environmental impacts of increased uranium extraction. Photograph, courtesy of Don Bills, USGS, 

shows the Kanab North Mines, northern Arizona.
Integrating Science Across USGS 37

health assessments. The Environmental Health research activities and efforts to establish linkages with the public health 

community will assist global change assessments, particularly 

in regard to the human-health implications of global change. 

Core Science Systems—Data on the geographic, geomorphologic, and geologic characteristics of the earth and the human 

infrastructure across the landscape are essential for any evaluation of the factors that affect the environment and associated 

impacts on the health of the environment. Determination of the 

cause of current environmental impacts and forecasts of potential future environmental impacts will require core science 

information on past trends, and will require projections of 

future changes in human activities on the landscape. Activities under the Core Science Systems Science Strategy will 

be a valuable source of this information, as well as a source 

of innovative tools for relating spatial data to environmental 

health outcomes, such as data on sources and distribution 

of environmental contamination and distribution of disease 

occurrence. Furthermore, the Core Science Systems Science 

Strategy will fulfill valuable supporting activities for the Environmental Health and other science strategies by providing 

tools for geospatial analysis of large datasets and providing 

innovative approaches to increase accessibility to a wide range 

of natural science information from all other USGS science 

strategies. 

Ecosystems—The improved understanding of fundamental 

ecosystem processes and functions that will be developed by 

the Ecosystems Science Strategy is essential to characterizing 

and responding to the impacts of environmental contaminants 

and pathogens. The effects of ecosystem changes will alter 

organisms’ exposure to chemical contaminants, vectors, and 

pathogens. Changing habitats and biodiversity will affect the 

resilience of ecosystems to environmentally driven disease. 

The degradation of ecosystem processes ultimately may lead 

to adverse effects on human health. Invasive species can serve 

as a source of exotic pathogens. A broad range of ecological 

stressors will contribute to cumulative ecological impacts. 

Knowledge of the effects of ecological factors as well as alternative resource management actions will be essential in preventing and mitigating the effects of environmentally driven 

disease. An understanding of the linkages between changes in 

ecosystem function and health risks is necessary to identify 

and predict emerging health risks, and to develop adaptive 

management strategies.

Energy and Mineral Resources—All actions to extract and 

use energy and mineral resources have some implication for 

the environment. Mineral and coal mining, generation and 

disposal of produced waters, burning of fossil fuels, spills and 

leaks of energy and mineral industry chemicals, hydraulic 

fracturing, and development of alternative energy sources such 

Highlight

Sensitivity of Freshwater Mussels to Ammonia Results in Lower Water-Quality Criteria

Approximately 10 percent of native North American freshwater mussels and snails have become extinct in historical 

times, and about one-half of the remaining 900 species are 

of conservation concern. One hundred freshwater mollusk species are listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

as threatened or endangered. Factors that contributed to 

these declines include habitat alteration, invasive species, 

over-utilization, disease, predation, and contaminants. 

USGS toxicologists helped develop a new standard method 

for conducting toxicity testing on freshwater mussels 

and found that mussels are frequently more sensitive to 

ammonia than standard test organisms. This is noteworthy 

because ammonia is the most ubiquitous toxic chemical 

in our Nation’s surface waters. Consequently, U.S. EPA is 

using mussel toxicity data to update the National WaterQuality Criteria for ammonia, lowering the acute criterion 

by about three-fold and chronic criterion by about five-fold. 

Photograph, courtesy of Chris Barnhart, shows an assemblage of mussels from the Pomme de Terre River, Hickory County, 

Missouri, including black sandshell, white heelsplitter, fatmucket, pink heelsplitter, three-ridge, deertoe, and pocketbook. 

More information is available online at http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Projects.aspx?ProjectId=5.
38 USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

as biofuels, new battery technology, and geothermal and wind 

energy all can impact the environment. Actions of this strategy 

and the Energy and Mineral Resources Science Strategy will 

be coordinated to evaluate the environmental impacts and 

resulting public health implications of energy and mineral 

resource production and use. Energy and Mineral Resources 

research activities will help characterize the mineralogic and 

geochemical properties of energy and mineral resource deposits, baseline geochemical conditions in soil and sediment, 

and the mobilization of naturally occurring contaminants by 

resource extraction activities. Environmental Health research 

activities will provide expertise in the factors that affect contaminant transport, exposure pathways to aquatic and terrestrial organisms, and ecological effects.

Natural Hazards—Beyond the immediate threats posed by 

floods, hurricanes, wildfires, volcanic eruptions, and earthquakes, these disasters can leave lingering environmental 

health concerns. Natural hazards often cause environmental disturbances that have an impact on the sources of, and 

exposures to contaminants and pathogens. The long-term 

environmental health consequences of natural disasters, which 

are often less understood, can warrant significant concern. 

Strategic activities under the Environmental Health Science 

Strategy will be coordinated with the Natural Hazards Science 

Strategy to help characterize the environmental health effects 

of hazards by: (1) building upon their actions in immediate 

response to such disasters with assessments of potential longterm environmental health implications, including changes 

in contaminant sources and exposure pathways and changes 

in the habitat of pathogens and vectors, (2) improving preparedness by helping to identify measures that will prevent 

or mitigate potential environmental health problems, and (3) 

defining rapid-response actions that can be taken to quickly 

define environmental health risks in the immediate aftermath 

of disasters.

Water—The hydrologic cycle plays an essential role in the 

distribution of natural and anthropogenic contaminants, vectors, and pathogens in aquatic and terrestrial environments, 

and in determining ecological and human exposure to these 

contaminants. Knowledge gained from implementation of the 

USGS Water Science Strategy will be essential for effective 

implementation of this strategy. A fundamental understanding 

of the natural and human factors that affect water quantity, 

movement, and quality is required to define various sources of 

contaminants and pathogens, to determine their relative importance, and to characterize environmental settings that may be 

more vulnerable to various environmental health concerns. 

Many hydrologic factors influence the health of the environment and must be considered when determining the specific 

causes of adverse environmental health outcomes and identifying best management practices. The Environmental Health 

Science Strategy will coordinate closely with large USGS 

water quantity and quality assessment programs to make 

added use of their national monitoring networks, infrastructure 

for surveillance, and the associated datasets in interpretations of environmental health issues. Furthermore, a priority 

of the Environmental Health Science Strategy is to develop 

new tools and methodologies to identify and address emerging environmental health concerns. This includes developing 

methods to measure contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern in the environment, and using those methods to 

make initial assessments of the relative priorities. These new 

methods and the information they provide will be made available to Water programs for design and implementation of their 

systematic national monitoring and assessment activities.

Highlight

Earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters are well 

known for the threats they pose to human safety. USGS has helped describe the 

less publicized but potentially significant threats these disasters can pose to 

environmental health, such as the Valley Fever outbreak associated with the 1994 

Northridge California earthquake and health implications of exposure to volcanic ash. More recently, USGS expertise from across the Bureau is being called 

upon to help assess the environmental, ecological, and human-health impacts 

of hurricanes, dust storms, flooding, wildfires, and other extreme events as they 

affect the United States. The USGS also is integrating environmental health considerations into its disaster scenarios that model and help prepare for plausible 

impacts of future disasters, such as the Southern California ShakeOut earthquake 

and ARkStorm extreme winter storm scenarios. More information is available in 

the article titled “Geoscientists Aid in the Aftermath of Disasters”, in the magazine Earth (Plumlee, 2009).

Environmental Health and Hazards
Summary of Intended Outcomes 39

Summary of Intended Outcomes

This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The 

ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the 

environment, the health of our living resources, and human 

health by providing high-quality objective environmental 

health science information and tools that are used by managers, regulators, other scientists, industry, and the public to 

make improved decisions that directly affect health outcomes. 

It is the responsibility of USGS to reach broadly across its 

scientific expertise and bring the fullest extent of its capabilities and scientific contributions to fulfill this role. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to scientific partners to ensure that 

our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the 

activities of others across the broader environmental health 

science community. Finally it is incumbent on USGS to reach 

out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused 

on the highest priority environmental health issues and that 

products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all 

those who can use them.

Although prevention is not always feasible, science to 

support prevention is a high priority of this strategy. The strategic science actions proposed herein will provide new tools 

and fundamental knowledge for managing the release, mitigation, management, and remediation of the most significant 

environmental contamination problems facing the Nation in 

the next decade. These strategic science actions also will characterize the factors that affect transmission of diseases with the 

goal of informing decisions to reduce the spread and adverse 

health outcomes of disease among free-ranging populations 

of aquatic and terrestrial animals, domesticated animals, and 

humans. Strategic science actions to enhance the understanding of the effects of exposure to combinations of contaminants 

and pathogens will help explain heretofore poorly understood 

diseases, and help to more accurately quantify the individual 

impacts of different disease agents on the health of aquatic 

and terrestrial organisms. Finally, strategic science actions to 

implement a coordinated Bureau-wide capability for rapidresponse to characterize the environmental impacts of disasters are intended to integrate USGS expertise in environment 

and wildlife health with USGS capabilities in preparation for 

and response to disasters, and provide that expertise to agencies with the primary responsibility for disaster response.

The actions proposed in this strategy will draw on science activities from across the Bureau including activities 

conducted as part of other science strategies. Similarly, the 

activities conducted as part of this strategy will support the 

activities of the other six science strategies. Collectively, these 

seven USGS science strategies will allow the coordination of 

research activities and the sharing of expertise and information, while providing a point of direct access to USGS products and expertise in environmental health science.

USGS scientist is interviewed 

by KOMO-TV (ABC, Seattle) 

at the Swinomish Tribal 

Community Center on 

July 21, 2008, near La Conner, 

Washington. The Coast 

Salish Nation and Swinomish 

Indian Tribal Community, 

in partnership with the 

U.S. Geological Survey. has 

examined the coastal waters 

of the Salish Sea providing 

a new strategy that blends 

western science and Coast 

Salish culture to study 

water-quality and its effects 

on environmental health. 

Photograph by John Clemens, 

USGS.
40 USGS Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to recognize John Lamoreux for 

his work as executive secretary of the Science Strategy Planning Team responsible for preparing this strategy, and Eric A. 

Morrissey for the preparation of illustrations in this report. The 

report was improved by reviews from the following USGS 

scientists, Collin A. Eagles-Smith, James F. Fairchild, Milton 

Friend, Denis R. LeBlanc, William H. Orem, Frank Panek, 

John M. Pearce, Barnett A. Rattner, Roger Sayre, and William 

G. Wilber. 

We also would like to thank the scientists from many 

Federal agencies who provided input to this strategy for their 

agencies. 

USGS scientist installing ocean chemistry monitoring 

equipment on Sombrero Reef, Florida Keys, July 9, 2009. 

Photograph by Ilsa B. Kuffner, USGS.
References Cited 41

References Cited

American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008, One health—

A new professional imperative: Schaumburg, Illinois, Final 

Report, One Health Initiative Task Force, 71 p.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention, 2011, National Select 

Agent Registry, accessed June 26, 2011, at http://www.

selectagents.gov/select%20agents%20and%20Toxins%20

list.html.

Birnbaum, L.S., 2012, Environmental chemicals—Evaluating low-dose effects: Environmental Health Perspectives, 

v. 120, no. 4, p. A143–A144.

Blazer, V.S., Iwanowicz, L.R., Starliper, C.E., Iwanowicz, 

D.D., Barbash, P., Hedrick, J.D., Reeser, S.J., Mullican, J.E., 

Zaugg, S.D., Burkhardt, M.R., and Kelble, J., 2010, Mortality of centrarchid fishes in the Potomac drainage—Survey 

results and overview of potential contributing factors: Journal of Aquatic Animal Health, v. 22, no. 3, p. 190–218.

Boyles, J.G., Cryan, P.M., McCracken, G.F., and Kunz, T.H., 

2011, Economic importance of bats in agriculture: Science, 

v. 332, no. 6025, p. 41–42.

Brian, J.V., Harris, C.A., Scholze, Martin, Backhaus, Thomas, 

Booy, Petra, Lamoree, Marja, Pojana, Giulio, Jonkers, 

Niels, Runnalls, Tamsin, Bonfà, Angela, Marcomini, 

Antonio, and Sumpter, J.P., 2005, Accurate prediction of 

the response of freshwater fish to a mixture of estrogenic 

chemicals: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 113, 

no. 6, p. 721–728.

Buxton, H.T., Griffin, D.W., Pierce, B.S., 2008, Earth science 

and public health—Proceedings of the second national 

conference on USGS health-related research: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5022, 47 

p. (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5022/pdf/

sir2008-5022.pdf.)

Diamanti-Kandarakis, Evanthia, Bourguignon, Jean-Pierre, 

Giudice, L.C., Hauser, Russ, Prins, G.S., Soto, A.M., 

Zoeller, R.T., and Gore, A.C., 2009, Endocrine-disrupting 

chemicals—An Endocrine Society scientific statement: 

Endocrine Reviews, v. 30, no. 4, p. 293–342.

Feingold, B.J., Vogosen, Leora, Davis, Meghan, Leibler, 

Jessica, Peterson, Amy, Silbergeld, E.K. 2010, A niche for 

infectious disease in environmental health—Rethinking the 

toxicological paradigm: Environmental Health Perspectives, 

v. 118, no. 8, p. 1165–1172.

Friend, Milton, 2006, Disease emergence and resurgence—The wildlife-human connection: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1285, 108 p. (Also available at 

http://137.227.242.129/publications/disease_emergence/.)

Government Accountability Office, 2011, Antibiotic resistance—Data gaps will remain despite HHS taking steps 

to improve monitoring: Washington D.C., Government 

Accountability Office report GAO-11-406, 66 p.

Hinck, J.E., Blazer, V.S., Schmitt, C.J., Papoulias, D.M., and 

Tillitt, D.E., 2009, Widespread occurrence of intersex in 

black basses (Micropterus spp.) from U.S. rivers, 1995–

2004: Aquatic Toxicology, v. 95, no. 1, p. 60–70.

Institute of Medicine, 2011, Roundtable on Environment, 

Health Sciences, Research, and Medicine, accessed June 15, 

2011, at http://www.iom.edu/Activities/Environment/

EnvironmentalHealthRT.aspx.

Jerolmack, Colin, 2012, Who’s worried about turkeys? 

How ‘organisational silos’ impede zoonotic disease 

surveillance: Sociology of Health and Illness, doi: 

10.1111/j.1467-9566.2012.01501.x, accessed October 1, 

2012, at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-

9566.2012.01501.x/abstract.

Johnson, P.T.J., Chase, J.M., Dosch, K.L., Hartson, R.B., 

Gross, J.A., Larson, D.J., Sutherland, D.R., and Carpenter, 

S.R., 2007, Aquatic eutrophication promotes pathogenic 

infection in amphibians: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., v. 104, no. 40, p. 15781–15786.

Jones, K.E., Patel, N.G., Levy, M.A., Storeygard, Adam, Balk, 

Deborah, Gittleman, J.L., and Daszak, Peter, 2008, Global 

trends in emerging infectious diseases: Nature, v. 451, 

no. 7181, p. 990–993.

Kidd, K.A., Blanchfield, P.J., Mills, K.H., Palace, V.P., Evans, 

R.E., Lazorchak, J.M., and Flick, R.W., 2007, Collapse of 

a fish population after exposure to a synthetic estrogen: 

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 

v. 104, no. 21, p. 8897–8901.

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., 

Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T., 2002, Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams 1999–2000—A national reconnaissance: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, no. 6, 

p. 1202–1211.

Lederberg, Joshua, Shope, R.E., and Oaks, S.C., Jr., eds., 

1992, Emerging infections—Microbial threats to health in 

the United States: Washington, D.C., Institute of Medicine, 

National Academy of Sciences, 294 p.

McKinney, C.W., Loftin, K.A., Meyer, M.T., Davis, J.G., 

Pruden, A., 2010, tet and sul antibiotic resistance genes in 

livestock lagoons of various operation type, configuration, 

and antibiotic occurrence: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 44, no. 16, p. 6102–6109.
42 USGS Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World

McNutt, M.K., 2010, Strategic science planning and high-level 

budget development—Charge to Science Strategy Planning Team (SSPT): Director’s memorandum to USGS staff, 

January 26, 2010. (Also available at http://www.usgs.gov/

start_with_science/docs/ss_charter.pdf.)

Morens, D.M., Folkers, G.K., and Fauci, A.S., 2008, Emerging infections—A perpetual challenge: Lancet Infectious 

Diseases, v. 8, no. 11, p. 710–719.

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 2006, 

NIEHS 2006–2011 Strategic Plan—New frontiers in environmental sciences and human health: U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, NIH Publication 2006–218, 

24 p.

National Science and Technology Council, 2008, National 

nanotechnology initiative—Strategy for nanotechnologyrelated environmental, health, and safety research: Washington, D.C., Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology, Committee on Technology, 90 p. 

National Research Council, 2007, Earth materials and health, 

research priorities for earth science and public health: 

Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 176 p.

Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2011, National Science and Technology Council Committee on Environment, 

Natural Resources, and Sustainability, accessed June 15, 

2011, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/

ostp/nstc/committees/cenrs.

Paine, R.T., Tegner, M.J., and Johnson, E.A., 1998, Compounded perturbations yield ecological surprises: Ecosystems, v. 1, no. 6, p. 535–545.

Phillips, P.J., Smith, S.G., Kolpin, D.W., Zaugg, S.D., Buxton, 

H.T., Furlong, E.T., Esposito, Kathleen, and Stinson, Beverley, 2010, Pharmaceutical formulation facilities as sources 

of opioids and other pharmaceuticals to wastewater treatment plant effluents: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 44, no. 13, p. 4910–4916.

Plumlee, G.S., 2009, Report from ground zero—How geoscientists aid in the aftermath of environmental disasters: 

Earth, v. 54, no. 10, p. 38–47.

President’s Cancer Panel, 2010, Reducing environmental 

cancer risk—What we can do now: 2008–2009 Annual 

Report of the President’s Cancer Panel, U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 

National Cancer Institute, 147 p. plus appendixes, accessed 

August 8, 2011, at http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/

annualReports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf.

Prüss-Ütün, A., and Corvalán, C., 2006, Preventing disease 

through healthy environments—Towards an estimate of 

the environmental burden of disease: Geneva, Switzerland, 

World Health Organization, 104 p.

Stahl, R.G., Hooper, M.J., Balbus, J.M., Clements, W., Fritz, 

A., Gouin, T., Helm, R., Hickey, C., Landis, W., and Moe, 

J.S., 2013, The influence of global climate change on the 

scientific foundations and applications of environmental toxicology and chemistry—Introduction to a SETAC 

international workshop: Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry, v. 32, no. 1, p. 13–19. (Also available at http://

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/etc.2037/abstract.)

Stone, W.W., Gilliom, R.J., and Crawford, C.G. 2008, Watershed Regressions for Pesticides (WARP) for predicting 

annual maximum and maximum moving-average concentrations of atrazine in streams: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2008–1186, 19 p. (Also available at http://pubs.

usgs.gov/of/2008/1186/pdf/ofr2008-1186.pdf.)

Tillitt, D.E., Papoulias, D.M., Whyte, J.J., and Richter, C.A., 

2010, Atrazine reduces reproduction in fathead minnow 

(Pimephales promelas): Aquatic Toxicology, v. 99, no. 2, 

p. 149–159.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2003, Economic impact of 

West Nile Virus on the Colorado and Nebraska equine 

industries: 2002. Info Sheet #N394.0403, April 2003, 

accessed March 22, 2012, at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/

animal_health/nahms/equine/downloads/wnv2002_CO_

NB.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2010, Colony collapse disorder progress report: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 7 p.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009, 

National health security strategy of the United States of 

America: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, 43 p., accessed July 29, 2011 at 

http://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/authority/nhss/

strategy/Documents/nhss-final.pdf.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2008, National 

response framework: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Homeland Security [FEMA publication P-682], 

82 p., accessed July 29, 2011, at http://www.fema.gov/pdf/

emergency/nrf/nrf-core.pdf.

U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010, Strategic Plan for Fiscal 

Years 2011–2016: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of 

the Interior, 44 p., accessed August 8, 2011, at http://www.

doi.gov/pmb/ppp/strategic-planning.cfm.
References Cited 43

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008, 2008 report 

on the environment: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment, EPA/600/R-07/045F, 366 p., accessed 

August 8, 2011, at http://www.epa.gov/roe/.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2010, Drinking water 

strategy: World Wide Web accessed July 29, 2011, at http://

water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/dwstrategy/index.

cfm.

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, 69 p. 

(Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2007/1309/.)

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012a, USGS oil spill response: 

Accessed July 12, 2012, at http://www.usgs.gov/oilspill/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012b, USGS Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project: Accessed August 15, 2012, at http://

urbanearth.gps.caltech.edu/about/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012c, GeoHealth Newsletter—The 

U.S. Geological Survey’s environmental health newsletter, 

accessed May 16, 2012, at http://health.usgs.gov/geohealth/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2011, USGS CoreCast—It’s natural 

science from the inside out: Accessed June 15, 2011, at 

http://www.usgs.gov/corecast/.

The White House, 2010, National security strategy: Washington, D.C., The White House, 52 p., accessed July 25, 2011, 

at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/

national_security_strategy.pdf.

Vandenberg, L.N., Colborn, T., Hayes, T.B., Heindel, J.J., 

Jacobs, D.R., Lee, D., Shioda, T., Soto, A.M., vom Saal, 

F.S., Welshons, W.V., Zoeller, R.T., and Myers, J.P., 2012, 

Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals—

Low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses: 

Endocrine Reviews, v. 33, no. 3, p. 378–455.

Woolhouse, M.E.J., and Gowtage-Sequeria, Sonya, 2005, Host 

range and emerging and reemerging pathogens: Emerging 

Infectious Diseases, v. 11, no. 12, p. 1842–1847.

World Health Organization, 2011, About the One Health 

Initiative: accessed September 15, 2011, at http://www.

onehealthinitiative.com/about.php.

USGS scientist downloads 

data from phenocam located 

in Idaho. The phenocam 

takes a picture daily and that 

data is used to help track 

phenological changes (the 

timing and vigor of seasonal 

biological events). The data 

from the phenocam is used 

(with other data) to gain 

a better understanding of 

vegetation changes over the 

entire ecoregion. Photograph 

by USGS.
Publishing support provided by the Rolla Publishing Service Center.

Bright and others—U.S. Geological Survey Environmental Health Science Strategy—Providing Environmental Health Science for a Changing World—Circular 1383–E

Printed on recycled paper