Geology ReportsSearch

place

Maryland

Maryland: explore 4 source-linked works published from 1998 to 2024, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Search within this collection

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: usgs. Collection updated 2026-09-14. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

Joint pilot fish habitat framework

This story map will take you through the process of exploring and testing methods necessary for a higher resolution, seamless fish habitat assessment across both inland and estuarine waters through the lens of our joint pilot assessment Fish habitat assessments attempt to relate past, current, or future landscape conditions to the state of fish species occurrence, distribution, abundance, or community and habitat condition in streams, rivers, or estuaries. Previous fish habitat assessments, such as the National Fish Habitat Assessment, conducted separate and disconnected assessments for inland waters and estuaries. In this project, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ) and U.S. Geological Survey ( USGS ) researchers created a seamless spatial framework to allow assessments that integrate influences on fish habitat from headwaters to the estuary. This effort began when the Chesapeake Bay Program Fish Habitat Action Team expressed interest in a Baywide fish habitat assessment spanning tidal salt, tidal fresh, warm non-tidal, and cold non-tidal waters. However, the complexity of the myriad of implementation details to consider when developing such an assessment necessitated the need for a tributary-specific pilot assessment. To conduct this pilot assessment, a NOAA/USGS joint partnership was formed with cooperation and support from the Chesapeake Bay Agreement and Chesapeake Bay Fish Habitat Action Team (FHAT).

Maryland

Technique for simulating peak-flow hydrographs in Maryland

The efficient design and management of many bridges, culverts, embankments, and flood-protection structures may require the estimation of time-of-inundation and (or) storage of floodwater relating to such structures. These estimates can be made on the basis of information derived from the peak-flow hydrograph. Average peak-flow hydrographs corresponding to a peak discharge of specific recurrence interval can be simulated for drainage basins having drainage areas less than 500 square miles in Maryland, using a direct technique of known accuracy. The technique uses dimensionless hydrographs in conjunction with estimates of basin lagtime and instantaneous peak flow. Ordinary least-squares regression analysis was used to develop an equation for estimating basin lagtime in Maryland. Drainage area, main channel slope, forest cover, and impervious area were determined to be the significant explanatory variables necessary to estimate average basin lagtime at the 95-percent confidence interval. Qualitative variables included in the equation adequately correct for geographic bias across the State. The average standard error of prediction associated with the equation is approximated as plus or minus (+/-) 37.6 percent. Volume correction factors may be applied to the basin lagtime on the basis of a comparison between actual and estimated hydrograph volumes prior to hydrograph simulation. Three dimensionless hydrographs were developed and tested using data collected during 278 significant rainfall-runoff events at 81 stream-gaging stations distributed throughout Maryland and Delaware. The data represent a range of drainage area sizes and basin conditions. The technique was verified by applying it to the simulation of 20 peak-flow events and comparing actual and simulated hydrograph widths at 50 and 75 percent of the observed peak-flow levels. The events chosen are considered extreme in that the average recurrence interval of the selected peak flows is 130 years. The average standard errors of prediction were +/- 61 and +/- 56 percent at the 50 and 75 percent of peak-flow hydrograph widths, respectively.

Maryland
Compare source metadata on this page

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.