Mineral Resources and Society: A Review of the U.S. Geological Survey's Mineral Resource Surveys Program Plan (1996)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 10 additional information is provided in Chapter 2. Each subprogram is divided into components, and each component is further divided into elements (Figure 1-2). The budgets for the subprograms and components are shown in Table 1-1 and Figure C of Appendix A. The most significant changes are an increase in the budget for the Mitigation Studies Subprogram and a decrease in the budget for the Resource Investigations Subprogram. The budgets for the remaining two subprograms—Assessments and Information and Technology Transfer—show little change. The four subprograms are designed to reflect perceived national needs, and funding is readjusted annually within the MRSP in order to better address the major minerals issues facing the nation. The Plan is presented as a framework for fundamental research and applied scientific projects to be conducted over the next five years. Potential new projects will be evaluated as to consistency with the goals of the MRSP. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS AND NATIONAL MINERALS NEEDS Most nations have government-supported geological agencies, commonly referred to as geological surveys, that are counterparts of the Geologic Division of the USGS. The common denominator in the missions of the major national geological surveys is the provision of geoscience information needed by nations to aid in managing resources, ensuring environmental quality, contributing to economic development, and promoting the safety and security of their citizens. Most national geological surveys are undergoing major changes in response to pressures to reduce costs and make their programs more relevant to societal needs (Appendix D). Although there are differences in emphasis and priority among mission components, the provision of information needed for the assurance of an adequate supply of mineral resources remains central to the missions of most national geological surveys. The mission of the USGS is to provide information that will: • mitigate losses resulting from national disasters; • help manage the nation's water, energy, and mineral resources; 

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 11 TABLE 1-1 Budget for MRSP subprograms and components based on FY 1995 appropriation (in millions of dollars). YR1 YR2 YR3 YR4 YR5 Assessments Subprogram Resource and Environmental 20.61 20.16 19.71 19.26 19.26 Assessments Assessment Protocols and Methods 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Total 21.51 21.06 20.61 20.16 20.16 Mitigation Studies Subprogram Geochemical Backgrounds and 2.24 2.69 3.14 4.03 4.03 Baselines Studies in Support of Remediation 2.69 2.69 2.69 3.14 3.14 Environmental Behavior of Mineral 4.03 4.48 4.93 4.93 4.93 Deposits Total 8.96 9.86 10.76 12.10 12.10 Resource Investigations Subprogram Mineral-Resource Frontiers 3.58 3.36 2.91 2.24 2.24 Minderal-Deposit Studies 3.14 2.91 2.69 2.24 2.24 Cooperative Industry and International 0.45 0.45 0.67 0.90 0.90 Investigations Total 7.17 6.72 6.27 5.38 5.38 Information and Technology Transfer Subprogram Data Bases and Information Analysis 4.93 4.93 4.93 4.48 4.48 Information and Technology Transfer 2.24 2.24 2.24 2.69 2.69 Total 7.17 7.17 7.17 7.17 7.17 Mineral Resource Surveys Program 44.81 44.81 44.81 44.81 44.81 Total SOURCE: MRSP Plan, Appendix B. 

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 12 FIGURE 1-2 Organization of the (a) Assessments Subprogram; (b) Mitigation Studies Subprogram; (c) Resource Investigations Subprogram; and (d) Information and Technology Transfer Subprogram. SOURCE: U.S. Geological Survey, 1995. 

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 13 

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 14 • enhance and protect the quality of the environment; and • contribute to the nation's economic and physical development; thereby improving the safety, health, and well-being of the people (USGS mission statement, Appendix E). Although the MRSP is most closely associated with the second bullet of the USGS mission statement (“help manage the nation's water, energy, and mineral resources”), it is important to note that the program also addresses other elements of the USGS mission statement. For example, the Mitigation Studies Subprogram is directly relevant to the third bullet (“enhance and protect the quality of the environment”), and both the Assessments Subprogram and the Resource Investigations Subprogram are relevant to the fourth bullet (“contribute to the nation's economic and physical development”). The MRSP is only a small part of the USGS. It is a focus of scientific concentration within a universe of interlocking and interdependent scientific activities. Just as there are no discrete boundaries within the earth sciences, there are no discrete scientific boundaries that separate the MRSP from other programs within the USGS. Thus, in evaluating the Plan, the panel was cognizant that the MRSP is not a stand-alone program. A starting point for considering national needs for mineral resource research and information is the recognition that the United States is an important producer and consumer of minerals (Sidebar 1.1). As a consequence, the country faces important decisions involving the supply of raw materials, land use, and environmental protection. Land management agencies develop land-use plans that attempt to reconcile competing land-use alternatives, while recognizing the environmental implications of each. The development of mineral deposits requires environmentally sound methods of exploration and extraction, and mineral development increasingly must be balanced with alternative land-use considerations. Our ability to make informed decisions about these issues depends on having current, accurate, and unbiased scientific information on known and potential mineral resources, and on the environmental implications of their development. In the broadest sense, 

FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY 15 SIDEBAR 1.1 U.S. MINERAL PRODUCTION The United States is an important producer and consumer of minerals. Consumers generally obtain resources on the world market as cheaply as possible. Numerous natural, technical, economic, and political factors dictate where mining occurs—in which geologic province, in which climatic or ecological environment, and within which political boundary. A disproportionately large share of world production of any mineral commodity comes from a few very large deposits. The United States is fortunate in possessing a number of these large deposits commonly referred to as giant or world-class deposits. The U.S. possesses giant ore deposits of copper, gold, lead, molybdenum, silver, zinc, and other commodities, particularly in the western states and Alaska. Domestic resources throughout the country supply much of U.S. needs for many metals and most construction raw materials; some metals, such as aluminum, manganese, and tungsten, come primarily from foreign ores (Figure 1-3). The magnitude of the U.S. mineral industry is illustrated by both production and exploration activities. For example, the U.S. currently produces approximately 20 percent of the total copper mined in the world (Figure 1-4). Essentially all this production, plus copper recovered through recycling and a relatively small amount of net imports, is needed to meet domestic demands for refined copper (U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1995a). The U.S. also produces a large amount of gold with an annual gross value of more than $4 billion. Production in recent years has far outstripped that of any previous gold rush (Figure 1-5). The U.S. currently produces approximately 14 percent of the annual world production (Figure 1-4). This production not only meets domestic demands, it also provides for exports (U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1995b). The value of construction raw materials significantly exceeds the value of metals produced in the United States. In 1994, construction sand and gravel, crushed stone, and cement were produced from over 10,000 extractive operations (U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1995a). Because of high costs for transporting rock products from quarries to construction sites, sources tend to be local. All 50 states have sand and gravel