General Statement

The contributions of each programmatic budget activity to achieving these mission goals are identified in each Activity Summary and discussed further in the FY 2000 Annual Plan.

and the economy, the challenges we face today cause us to propose that the scientific and engineering enterprise ought to move towards center stage in a fourth role: that of helping society make good decisions. We believe this role for science will take on increasing importance, particularly as we face difficult decisions related to the environment. Accomplishing this goal will require, among other things, the development of research agendas aimed at analyzing and resolving contentious issues, and will demand closer coordination among scientists, engineers, and policymakers."

Similarly, House Report language accompanying the FY 1999 Appropriations states

"The Committee supports the team approach that integrates all of the Survey's programs into one interdisciplinary science program designed to address major societal problems."

As the science bureau for DOI, and the only integrated natural resources research bureau in the Federal Government, the USGS has the capability to work hand-in-hand with land managers at the local, State and national level. The USGS staff of biologists, geographers, geologists, hydrologists, and other professionals bring multidisciplinary expertise to bear on solving today's problems and provide the knowledge to land managers to ensure that decisions that are made today will not have unintended consequences tomorrow.

The USGS has engaged the public, private, and academic sectors in dialogue to guide our efforts at integrating science and to develop our research agenda. In November 1998, the USGS, Ecological Society of America (ESA), and Geological Society of America (GSA) held a workshop on enhancing integrated science. The participants discussed the social, scientific, and administrative environments that lead to successful collaboration and integration, produced an initial set of principles for integrating scientific efforts, and made recommendations for both the USGS and the larger scientific community to facilitate interdisciplinary work. Two previous workshops held by USGS, ESA, GSA, and the Keystone Center (a non-profit science and public policy and educational organization), identified new interdisciplinary research opportunities relevant to USGS mission.

The USGS is proposing an "Integrated Science" budget activity that will result in more efficient planning and operations for projects that benefit from the multidisciplinary science talents of the bureau. This new budget activity has two program components. “DOI Science Priorities" will focus on the high priority science needs of the Department's land management bureaus. "Place-based Studies" will focus on improving scientific understanding of complex, longstanding problems and providing scientific information in new, more comprehensive ways. This new budget activity will both facilitate the integration of activities, and provide the flexibility to shift emphasis and geographic location as customers' needs change.

DOI Science Priorities (+$15.0 million) — House Report language on the FY 1999
Appropriations states that

"The Committee recognizes the growing need for high priority on-the-ground
research for the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of
Land Management. The Committee has provided additional resources to meet
the growing demand for sound science on which to base resource management
decisions. The Committee is concerned that the Bureaus in the Department have
not been working with the Biological Resources Division to address their
scientific needs. The Committee strongly encourages all of the bureaus to use
the Biological Resources Division in carrying out the scientific responsibilities
within their jurisdiction."

In providing science for a changing world, the Department has a planned outcome that resource managers will make decisions based on accurate, reliable, and impartial scientific information. One of the strategies to achieve this outcome is to ensure that the scientific research program focuses on understanding, assessing, and monitoring ecosystems to provide scientific understanding and technologies needed to support sound land and resource management.

In FY 2000, a DOI-wide process is being piloted with NPS, FWS, and BLM to assess the status of current science support, identify gaps and cross-bureau applications, formulate priorities for USGS research in support of land management needs and obtain land management bureau input for defining GPRA metrics and science outcomes. Current cooperative activities with DOI provide a $15 million base program ($9.5 million from Biological Research, $3.5 million from Water Resources Investigations, and $2.0 million from Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes) for which an augmentation of $15 million is being requested in the FY 2000 budget to fund the science needs that the land management bureaus prioritize through this process.

The request provides the first step in establishing a broad partnership with these Federal managers to enhance scientifically sound management of the lands and resources under their stewardship. The Directors of NPS, FWS, and BLM have identified their highest priority needs for the integrated scientific capabilities of the USGS including: (1) formulation of strategies for ecosystem restoration; (2) establishment of ecosystem monitoring protocols; (3) assessment of rangeland and riparian health; (4) investigation and restoration of declining species and species at risk; (5) prediction and effects of invasive alien species; (6) Natural Resources Preservation Program tactical studies; and (7) assistance for making scientific data understandable to the public.

General Statement

Place-Based Studies (+$2.4 million) — A General Accounting Office report released in January 1999, GAO/OCG-99-1 Major Management Challenges and Program Risks — A Governmentwide Perspective, cites the need for improved coordination in managing Federal lands. GAO states that the key challenge is reconciling administrative boundaries with natural system boundaries in planning how best to manage land use and assessing the cumulative impact of Federal and non-Federal activities on the environment. The report cites as an example

"a widely recognized boundary of the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem
encompasses all or part of seven national forests, two national parks, and three
national wildlife refuges - most of which are covered by different plans."

This is precisely the type of challenge that USGS' integrated place-based science is poised to address, fostering collaborative decisionmaking among land management agencies. For the needs of Greater Yellowstone area, for example, USGS is conducting a pilot study to bring information into a common spatial framework (geographic information systems). By developing and sharing data resources with Federal and State agencies, information will be consistent and useful across ownership and management unit boundaries, and in a form that can be applied to management decisions concerning wildlife and its habitat, local zoning, geothermal and mineral resources, and natural hazards. Current integrated placebased studies in South Florida, San Francisco Bay, Chesapeake Bay, Greater Yellowstone, California Desert/Mojave, Platte River, Salton Sea provide a $15.3 million base for this program ($3.8 million from Biological Research, $5.6 million from Water Resources Investigations, and $3.2 million from Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes and $2.7 million from the National Mapping Program) for which an augmentation of $2.4 million is being requested in the FY 2000 budget. Scientific information provided by place-based studies can be used to guide land acquisition proposed in these areas under the Administration's Land Legacy initiative.

Of the $2.4 million increase requested, $1.3 million will augment current efforts in Yellowstone ($400,000), California Desert/Mojave ($500,000), and Platte River ($400,000). The remaining $1.1 million will support initiation of integrated place-based studies for the Great Lakes Region which includes nearly one-third of the Nation's population, about 50 percent of the Nation's heavy industry, and the bulk of one of the Nation's most important agricultural resource areas - the corn belt. Economically, the region accounts for about 56 percent, $180-200 billion, in trade between the United States and Canada. The Great Lakes Basin supplies the drinking water of 37 million people, and is responsible for a significant portion of $70 billion recreation and tourism industry of the Great Lakes States.

The EPA, FWS, NPS, the International Joint Commission, the Great Lakes Protection Fund, and Great Lake States have identified the need for integrated surficial geologic maps, ground water source and availability data, and terrestrial and aquatic resource information to provide decision tools to resource managers. These tools are necessary to help managers determine water supply availability, protect groundwater resources, and restore coastal habitats in this highly populated and increasingly developed region. Partnerships with stakeholders, such as our geologic mapping partnerships with State Geologic Surveys, are central to the success of this integrated science program.

General Statement

Community/Federal Information
Partnership (C/FIP)

America's communities need spatially
referenced environmental and natural
resources data to make informed decisions
that will ensure a high quality of life and a
strong, sustainable economic growth. Through
the Community/Federal Information
Partnership effort, the USGS will work with
State, local, and Tribal governments, the
private sector, academia, and others to
advance the abilities of communities to create
and use spatially referenced data, and to
improve the USGS's ability to provide spatially
referenced earth science information through

the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). Additional information about the interagency C/FIP effort is available at http://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/docs/comfedip.html; for more information on the NSDI, visit http://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/nsdi.html.

A 1998 report by a panel of the National Academy of Public Administration, “Geographic Information for the 21st Century: Building a Strategy for the Nation," endorses vigorous development of the NSDI to meet the Nation's needs for geospatial information. The House Appropriations Committee's report on the FY 1999 Appropriations Bill acknowledged the panel's report and its recommendations for development of NSDI. Regarding the entire range of services that have evolved in the geospatial arena, the Committee report states that

"USGS is clearly the lead agency both within the Department, and among
Federal, State, and local agencies and the private sector. The Committee
endorses the idea of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure and expects the
Survey to expand the partnerships and cooperation with State and local
governments and the private sector to create an NSDI. "

The C/FIP program improves the USGS's ability to respond to the Committee's challenges. The FY 2000 budget includes an increase of $10.0 million for C/FIP. Of this amount, $6.7 million will be channeled through matching grants and other cooperative mechanisms to work with communities to develop spatially referenced earth and biological science data that benefit both communities and USGS programs, and to integrate these data into communities' decisionmaking processes. Such information is becoming an increasingly important tool in the effective resolution of growth debates in communities across the country.

C/FIP was developed with other Federal agencies, and was reviewed by State and local government organizations and others, through the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The program will expand these activities:

Data: The USGS will increase collaborative efforts with the public and private sectors to develop spatially referenced earth and biological science data. Explosive interest in these data provides opportunities to leverage Federal data investments, resulting in increased and more current data coverage for both communities and Federal agencies. Cooperative

General Statement

development of common geographic data also aids collaborative decisionmaking for issues of interest to both communities and Federal agencies, and helps to bring Federal scientific data and expertise to bear on issues faced by communities. The Community/Federal Information Partnership provides resources needed to spur these cooperative efforts to develop these data and to improve the compatibility of data. The emphasis will be on geographic orthoimage, elevation, and hydrography data, and biological data needed for land management and surficial geologic data. In addition, USGS will work with others to develop and test standards for spatially referenced geologic and water data. These standards will increase the benefits of future investments by ensuring that data can be combined and reused by many organizations and for many applications.

Access: Spatially referenced data held by the USGS can aid decisions regarding economic, social, and environmental issues facing the Nation. The FY 2000 budget increase will improve access to these data through the use of advanced Internet-based technologies and participation in the National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse. Communities, government, industry, and the public will be able to conduct Internet-based search, retrieval, and display of spatially referenced biologic, geographic, geologic, and remotely sensed data.

This program is part of the Administration's $39.5 million interagency Community/ Federal Information Partnership within the comprehensive Livable Communities Initiative. This FGDCcoordinated interagency effort is designed to make new information and tools readily available to communities. This effort also responds to the House Appropriations Committee FY 1999 report language which states

USGS should also continue to work within the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) to define better Federal agency roles and responsibilities for NSDI, including coordinated goals, performance measures, strategies, and budgets."

Understand and Use America's Living Capital," PCAST acknowledges that

"we are not able to formulate a strategy for the 21 Century that couples environmental well being with economic growth, in part because our knowledge of the environment and our skills at using data are not sufficiently developed."

Yet, the report goes on to say,

"we have the technology to harness information theories and large capacity computational systems to develop a clear vision of the biological world and we have a