Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · sir20155019B

Temporal trends and stationarity in annual peak flow and peak-flow timing for selected long-term streamflow-gaging stations in or near Montana through water year 2011: Chapter B in Montana StreamStats

Abstract

A large-scale study by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Montana Department of Transportation and the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, was done to investigate general patterns in peak-flow temporal trends and stationarity through water year 2011 for 24 long-term streamflow-gaging stations (hereinafter referred to as gaging stations) in Montana. Hereinafter, all years refer to water years; a water year is the 12-month period from October 1 through September 30 and is designated by the year in which it ends. The primary focus of the study was to identify general patterns in peak-flow temporal trends and stationarity that are relevant to application of peak-flow frequency analyses within a statewide gaging-station network. Temporal trends were analyzed for two hydrologic variables: annual peak flow and peak-flow timing. Annual peak flow is the maximum instantaneous discharge, in cubic feet per second, recorded each year a gaging station was operated. Peak-flow timing is the day of the annual peak flow (hereinafter referred to as day of peak), recorded each year a gaging station was operated. Study results provide evidence that annual peak flow for most of the long-term gaging stations can be reasonably considered as stationary for application of peak-flow frequency analyses within a statewide gaging station network. Upward trends in annual peak flow during 1930–76 generally were stronger than downward trends during 1967–2011 for most long-term gaging stations. Statistical distributions of annual peak flow generally were similar among three summary time periods (1930–78, 1979–2011, and the entire period of record). However, for two low-elevation gaging stations in eastern Montana (Poplar River at international boundary [gaging station 06178000] and Powder River at Moorhead, Montana [gaging station 06324500]), substantial downward trends in annual peak flow during 1967–2011 were of similar or stronger magnitude than the upward trends during 1930–76, and the annual-peak-flow medians for 1979–2011 were substantially lower than the medians for the entire period of record. For peak-flow timing for most long-term gaging stations, differences in trends between 1930–76 and 1967–2011 are variable and not particularly strong. Statistical distributions generally are similar among the summary time periods. However, for two high-elevation gaging stations on a Missouri River headwater tributary (Gallatin River near Gallatin Gateway, Montana [gaging station 06043500] and Gallatin River at Logan, Montana [gaging station 06052500]) and for five high-elevation gaging stations in the Yellowstone River Basin (Yellowstone River at Corwin Springs, Montana [gaging station 06191500], Yellowstone River near Livingston, Montana [gaging station 06192500], Clarks Fork Yellowstone River near Belfry, Montana [gaging station 06207500], Clarks Fork Yellowstone River at Edgar, Montana [gaging station 06208500], and Yellowstone River at Billings, Montana [gaging station 06214500]) downward trends in peak-flow timing during 1967–2011 generally were stronger than upward trends during 1930–1976, and day-of-peak medians for 1979–2011 were considerably less than medians for 1930–78. The downward trends in peak-flow timing for 1967–2011 indicate that the timing of annual peak flows changed from later in the year to earlier in the year. For the seven high-elevation gaging stations, the mean change during 1967–2011 was about 13 days (range of 8 to 22 days). For most of the high-elevation gaging stations in the Missouri River headwaters, Yellowstone River Basin, and Columbia River Basin, there was general correspondence between trend patterns for annual peak flow and trend patterns for peak-flow timing; that is, during periods when there were upward trends in annual peak flow, there generally also were upward trends in peak-flow timing. Conversely, during periods when there were downward trends in annual peak flow, there generally also were downward trends in peak-flow timing. The two low-elevation gaging stations in eastern Montana (Poplar River at international boundary [gaging station 06178000] and Powder River at Moorhead, Montana [gaging station 06324500]) had considerable changes in annual-peakflow characteristics after the mid-1970s, which might provide evidence of potential nonstationarity in the peak-flow records. The two low-elevation gaging stations that have potential nonstationarity are located in drainage basins that are strongly affected by agricultural activities that potentially affect the hydrologic regimes. Primary agricultural activities that might alter natural hydrologic conditions include construction of small impoundments (primarily for stock-watering purposes) and irrigation diversions. Temporal variability in these activities might contribute to the potential nonstationarity issues. Changes in climatic characteristics after the mid-1970s also possibly contribute to the potential nonstationarity issues. Lack of considerable indication of potential nonstationarity in annual peak flow for the other long-term gaging stations in this study might indicate that climatic changes have been more pronounced with respect to effects on peak flows in low elevation areas in eastern Montana than in areas represented by the other long-term gaging stations. Another possibility is that climatic changes after the mid-1970s are exacerbated in low-elevation areas where small-impoundment development and potential effects of irrigation diversions might be more extensive.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 44.358221° to 49.00139° latitude; -116.050003° to -104.039563° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Steven K. Sando, Peter McCarthy, Roy Sando, DeAnn M. Dutton. 2016-04-05. Temporal trends and stationarity in annual peak flow and peak-flow timing for selected long-term streamflow-gaging stations in or near Montana through water year 2011: Chapter B in Montana StreamStats. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20155019b

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗