What Does the Demise of the National Research Program Mean for Subsurface Water Science?

Abstract

In her review of Benchmark Papers in Hydrogeology, Mary Anderson (2008) presented 35 of what she considered to be the most impactful papers written during the past 150 years from Darcy to Gorelick. Of these, more than a third were authored by staff from the National Research Program (NRP) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Resources Division (WRD; now the “Water Mission Area”). Two former members of the NRP have been inducted into the National Academy of Engineers and 12 are AGU fellows. Many former NRP hydrologists served as Birdsall-Dreiss (8) and Darcy Lecturers (4). Fifteen have received the Meinzer Award from the Geological Society of America. NRP alumni have started internationally renowned consulting firms including GEOTRANS and S.S. Papadopoulos & Associates. The NRP brought the hydrologic community innovations such as CFC dating, PHREEQC, NETPATH, and SUTRA. The groundwater code MODFLOW, which had its origins within the NRP, is now accepted as a regulatory and legal standard around the world. Ike Winograd, an NRP alumnus, pioneered the idea of disposing of our nation's high-level nuclear wastes within the vadose zone. Paul Hsieh, a former NRP hydrogeologist was selected as the U.S. Federal Employee of the Year in 2011 for his role in successfully capping the New Horizon Well in the Gulf of Mexico. Former NRP staff over the decades have mentored dozens of early career scientists including George Pinder, Steve Gorelick, Steve Silliman, Craig Simmons, Alicia Wilson, Brandon Dugan, Jesus Gomez-Velez, and Holly Michael who have gone on the have distinguished careers in academia. It is hard to imagine a more impactful or successful program. Thus, it is surprising that in 2017, the leadership of the USGS terminated the NRP. The termination of the USGS's National Research Program in the Water Mission Area is a serious loss to the USGS and the global water science community. The NRP spanned over 50 years from 1967 to 2017. At its peak in the 1980s, NRP funding represented less than 10 % of the total WRD budget. Its mission focused on fundamental research in the hydrologic sciences. NRP staff also served in an advisory capacity to WRD District Offices (now Water Science Centers) providing vital input to societally relevant water resource investigations. Over the past several decades reductions in funding by Congress have eroded NRP staff numbers. The negative impact of the termination of the NRP on U.S. water science will be significant. Already, talents and experiences are being drained prematurely, as many senior NRP scientists have either retired early or switched to different USGS programs. What is replacing the NRP is still emerging but it appears to be much more narrowly focused, programmatic and applied in nature. Hydrogeology is a diverse discipline embracing a wide range of topics from biogeochemistry to geophysics to flow through fractured rocks. Picking a few applied topics may be appealing to Congress but, in my view, does not serve the wider interests or needs of our Nation. Hydrogeology is not a static science. Recent innovations in hydrogeophysics, such as InSAR, is one example of how new ideas and technologies are transforming subsurface water science. Where will the next transformative ideas and innovations in hydrogeology come from now that the NRP gone? I call on USGS leadership to work closely with the agency's scientific staff to restore a broad scope of research in water sciences. I urge the U.S. Congress to increase funding to the USGS water mission to make this possible. It has been my experience that many USGS scientists work long hours (> 40 h/week) in the service of this Nation. This represents government at its best. I close by noting that Nature Index (https://www.natureindex.com/annual-tables/2016/institution/all/earth-and-environmental), a website which ranks leading earth science institutions reported that the USGS dropped in global ranking from 6th to 11th between 2015 and 2018. While there are many factors that influence these rankings, the termination of the NRP in my view, contributed to the USGS reduction in stature as one of the leading earth science institutions in the world. For the record, I was employed at the NRP in Reston, Virginia, between 1983 and 1985. Since leaving the USGS, I have published several papers with NRP staff between 1985 and 2017. The opinions expressed in this editorial are my own but are also shared by many of my colleagues in academia.