Mark Myers on USGS, scientific challenges

Barry Friedman

Explorer Correspondent

U.S. Geological Survey Director Mark Myers, an AAPG member who was nominated by President Bush and confirmed by the Senate in 2006, heads up an entity that has more than 10,000 scientists, technicians and support staff.

USGS, which has a budget of more than $1 billion, is located in nearly 400 offices in every state and in several foreign countries and partners with 2,000 agencies of state, local and tribal government, the academic community, other federal allies, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector.

USGS is known for its field investigations, direct observations of natural science processes and phenomena, and monitoring and data collection.

Before coming to USGS, Myers served as survey chief for field programs in the Mackenzie Delta (ARCO, 1985), and Alaska’s Cook Inlet (State of Alaska/USGS, 1997) and North Slope (ARCO, 1999). He also served as sedimentologist for 13 other North Slope field programs.

Past president and board member of the Alaska Geological Society, Myers is an AAPG certified petroleum geologist as well as a certified professional geologist with the American Institute of Professional Geologists and a licensed geologist with the State of Alaska.

And it was during his time as director of Alaska’s Division of Oil and Gas that he received some notoriety for resigning his position when he thought a gas pipeline deal that then-Gov. Frank Murkowski was pushing would short-change the state.

While he wouldn’t talk about it for this interview, he said in his resignation letter, “Staying in this position would require me to compromise my values as to what is right, both legally and ethically, and what is in the interests of the state. I cannot continue as director and watch silently as the state’s interests are undermined by creating barriers for the new oil and gas participants that are so vital to the economic future of our state.”

It is a testament to his ability to build coalitions that Murkowski supported his appointment to the USGS.

In his confirmation hearings, Myers addressed the sensitive subject of scientific independence, while underscoring the independence of the USGS.

“It’s incredibly important that the science is unbiased, that it is peer reviewed and objective,” he said. And then added, “That’s the way it needs to be so the Survey can deliver objective information.”

The Explorer asked Myers recently for his take on a range of issues, from research to funding to the tricky areas of politics and science. While careful not to address the contentious issue of whether or not the work of scientists has been muffled or distorted by the Bush Administration on issues that run counter to its political objectives, he does affirm the independence of both the USGS and his commitment to it.

Q. You once worked for ARCO (predecessor to ConocoPhillips); can you compare/contrast the experiences of working in the private sector vs. government?

A. There are similarities in large organizations whether they are government or private sector. However, the goal in the private sector is to bring profit back to the shareholders, while in government our goal is to serve the public.

To be successful, a large scientific organization such as the USGS must employ advanced technology as well as have a strong research component. The USGS is a scientific research organization that provides information to decision-makers at all levels of government so they can address and resolve complex natural resource problems.

Additionally, as a federal research agency with a non-advocacy role, USGS processes require a level of transparency and peer review of science different than that of a large corporation.

Q. What are your top priorities for yourself, and for USGS?

My top priorities are to chart a course for USGS where it can thrive in the future.

We have a long history of providing unbiased scientific research and information to decision makers, and I believe that need will only increase as our nation continues to address issues related to climate change, natural hazards, energy resources, water quality and availability, human health and ecosystem conservation.

In an effort to focus on societal challenges related to those areas we have crafted a USGS Science Strategy for the coming decade that defines challenges within these areas and opportunities where USGS science can serve the nation’s pressing needs; unites all of our capabilities; takes advantage of our strengths and our unique position as non-regulatory federal science agency with national scale and responsibilities; and will help us to focus our science capabilities to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

Q. What is your position on “peak oil?” Do you think this a topic needs a higher public profile and awareness?

A. The USGS doesn’t take a position on this issue.

There is certainly a need to better understand the true endowment of conventional and unconventional resources to understand when and where peaks might occur, but one needs to take a number of things into consideration when discussing or projecting peak oil, such as economics, markets, transportation and energy efficiency.

Q. In light of the budgetary and political arena, how would you describe morale at the USGS? Does it feel it has the support and faith of Congress and the current administration?

A. Overall I believe that the morale of employees is good. Our employees are among the most talented and dedicated professionals to be found in any organization. They are very proud of their outstanding history of public service and scientific advances.

While we have been faced with declining budgets over the past several years, the USGS continues to be a leader in collecting, monitoring, analyzing and providing scientific information and understanding about our nation’s landscape, natural resources and the natural hazards that threaten us.

Q. The USGS is, in a sense, where the country goes for its earth science education. What do you think is the most important scientific horizon out there and, by the same token, the least understood?

A. There is hardly a field of science today that does not have exciting and enormously promising research areas. Just by way of example:

Research at the USGS involving seismic imaging, tomography, interferometry, laser altimetry and GPS positioning is helping to interpret structure and dynamic processes from deep within Earth to its surface.

PCR-based DNA fingerprinting is helping to understand and, in some cases, restore genetically diverse habitats.

Satellite, broadband transmission of real-time discharge from our nationwide stream gage network is allowing our scientists to develop mapping methods that deliver on-line flood maps — including time of arrival, depth and extent of flooding — before a storm hits.

The new areas of fruitful study in the earth sciences is near limitless. However, because Earth itself is made up of countless interconnected and dynamic systems, it requires a kind of broad focus to begin to understand it.

As I see it, the ability to look for and find linkages, to establish relevant connections is the important scientific horizon out there and, by the same token, the least understood by way of the required research need and level of complexity. Debates engendered by issues over a range from global climate change, water availability and quality, species and habitat preservation or energy resources availability, must be informed by a “systems” approach and understanding.

This is not an easy task, for, historically, science disciplines have extended a great deal of knowledge through division and abstraction. “Isolation and abstraction” is still an important way by which most disciplines extend their knowledge, but they have their limitations. Recent research in earth systems has shown, quite poignantly, that when one tries to pick out anything by itself, it is found “hitched” to everything else.

To be involved in cutting-edge science today requires viewing Earth as a synergistic physical system of interrelated phenomena, governed by complex processes involving the geosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere. It centers on relevant interactions of chemical, physical, biological and dynamical processes that extend over a huge range of spatial scales from micron to planetary size, and over time scales of milliseconds to billions of years.

The Earth system approach is the critical framework and important scientific horizon from which to pose disciplinary and interdisciplinary questions in relationship to the important needs of humankind.

Q. Coming from Alaska as you do, do you feel you bring a special sensitivity to environmental issues?

A. One of the highlights of my career as a field geologist has been the ability to work in the beautiful remote areas of Alaska. As an Alaskan, I very much value and appreciate our natural environment. I recognize that there needs to be a balance between human needs and the natural world.

Because of this, I have a heightened sensitivity for the need to find that balance between nature and humans and try to live in harmony. But I also recognize that the nation has a great demand for natural resources in order to sustain our human needs and lifestyle.

USGS brings a multidisciplinary approach and scientific expertise to understanding that balance. As a non-advocacy agency with broad skills in geology, biology, water and geographic sciences, the USGS is uniquely positioned to provide the expertise to seek that harmony.