Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Disasters”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25Linked to original sources
USGS2003

The Role of Geoscience Information in Reducing Catastrophic Loss Using a Web-Based Economics Experiment

What role can geoscience information play in the assessment of risk and the value of insurance, especially for natural hazard type risks? In an earlier, related paper Ganderton and others (2000) provided subjects with relatively simple geoscience information concerning natural hazard-type risks. Their research looked at how subjects purchase insurance when faced with relatively low probability but high loss risks of the kind that characterize natural hazards and now, increasingly, manmade disasters. They found evidence to support the expected utility theory (definitions of economics terms can be found in a glossary at the end of report), yet there remained the implication that subjects with excessive aversion to risk were willing to pay considerably more for insurance than the actuarially fair price plus any reasonable risk premium. Here, we report the results of additional experiments that provide further support for the basic postulates of expected utility theory. However, these new experiments add considerably to the decision environment facing subjects by offering an option to purchase geoscientific information that would assist them when calculating expected losses from hazards more accurately. Using an Internet-based mechanism to present information and gather data in an experimental setting, this research provided subjects with considerable textual and graphical information, and time to process it. Over a period of three months, almost 400 subjects participated in on-line experiments that generated approximately 22,000 usable data points for the empirical analysis discussed in this report. In the design of the experiment, we modeled the decisions to purchase (1) a detailed map giving subjects more information regarding the distribution of losses from a hazard and (2) insurance to indemnify them from any losses should they occur. On the basis of this design, we find strong evidence in support of the expected utility theory. Many of the findings reinforce those found in the early, similar study (Ganderton and others, 2000). However, this research also finds interactions between the decision to become better informed and the decision to insure. We chose an empirical framework that allows for both explicit and implicit (unobservable) correlations between the two decisions. The results suggest that at the end of the computer game subjects recognize the benefits of greater geoscience information. They take advantage of it, but are sensitive to its cost. When subjects use the more detailed information, they are more likely to purchase insurance when it offers a net benefit.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2015

Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska, Volume 15

Summary Professional Paper 1814— Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska, Volume 15 —continues a long-running series of collected volumes of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientific reports on Alaska. This series presents new and sometimes preliminary findings that are of interest to Earth and biological scientists in academia, government, and industry; to land and resource managers; and to the general public. The series covers a broad spectrum of scientific topics, from various parts of Alaska, serving to emphasize the diversity of USGS efforts to meet the Nation’s needs for Earth-science information in the State. The USGS provides reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life.

Professional Paper↗
USGS1966

Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, in the Homer area, Alaska

The March 27, 1964, earthquake shook the Homer area for about 3 minutes. Land effects consisted of a 2- to 6-foot subsidence of the mainland and Homer Spit, one earthflow at the mouth of a canyon, several landslides on the Homer escarpment and along the sea bluffs, and minor fissuring of the ground, principally at the edges of bluffs and on Homer Spit. Hydrologic effects consisted of at least one and possibly two submarine landslides at the end of the spit, seiche waves in Kachemak Bay, ice breakage on Beluga Lake, sanding of wells, and a temporary loss of water in some wells. Seismic damage to the community was light in comparison with that of other communities closer to the epicenter. One submarine landslide, however, took out most of the harbor breakwater. The greatest damage was due to the subsidence of the spit, both tectonically (2–3 ft) and by differential compaction or lateral spreading (an additional 1–4 ft). Higher tides now flood much of the spit. The harbor and dock had to be replaced, and buildings on the end of the spit had to be elevated. Protection works for other buildings and the highway were needed. These works included application of fill to raise the highway and parts of the spit above high tides. Reconstruction costs and disaster loans totaled about $2½ million, but this amount includes added improvement costs over preexisting values. Homer Spit in particular and the Homer area in general rank as areas where precautions must be taken in selecting building sites. The hazards of landslides, earthflows, compaction and submarine slumping—all of which might be triggered by an earthquake—should be considered in site selection. In plan, Homer Spit resembles a scimitar with its curving blade pointed seaward. It is about 4 miles long and as much as 1,500 feet wide. The spit is composed largely of gravel intermixed with some sand. After the earthquake and the resulting tectonic subsidence and compaction, much of the spit was below high-tide levels and consequently flooded periodically. The entire beach face has retreated. Much of the material eroded from the beach has been redeposited to form a new storm or frontal berm, locally migrating around buildings and covering roads. Beach recession of 10–15 feet is probably the overall average; maximum recession 1 year after the earthquake was 56 feet along one limited section of the distal end of the spit. Subsidence of the mainland has caused accelerated erosion of the beaches and headlands that have been—and are—source areas for the material deposited on Homer Spit. The resulting increased supply of gravel and sand probably will cause the spit to widen gradually on the Cook Inlet side. Similarly, the new frontal berm will probably grow to a height sufficient to prevent overtopping by all but the larger storm swashes. The nature of shore processes on the spit has not been materially altered by subsidence, but the rates of erosion and deposition have been accelerated. The lasting effect of subsidence (excluding flooding) will be enlargement of the beach on the Cook Inlet side and gradual wasting of the beach on the bay side of the spit.

Alaska↗
USGS1967

Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, at Seward, Alaska

Seward, in south-central Alaska, was one of the towns most devastated by the Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964. The greater part of Seward is built on an alluvial fan-delta near the head of Resurrection Bay on the southeast coast of the Kenai Peninsula. It is one of the few ports in south-central Alaska that is ice free all year, and the town’s economy is almost entirely dependent upon its port facilities. The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, magnitude approximately 8.3–8.4, began at 6:36 p.m. Its epicenter was in the northern part of the Prince William Sound area; focal depth was 20–50 km. Strong ground motion at Seward lasted 3–4 minutes. During the shaking, a strip of land 50–400 feet wide along the Seward waterfront, together with docks and other harbor facilities, slid into Resurrection Bay as a result of large-scale submarine landsliding. Fractures ruptured the ground for'severa1 hundred feet back from the landslide scarps. Additional ground was fractured in the Forest Acres subdivision and on the alluvial floor of the Resurrection River valley; fountaining and sand boils accompanied the ground fracturing. Slide-generated wares, possibly seiche waves, and seismic sea waves crashed onto shore; ware runup was as much as 30 feet above mean lower low water and caused tremendous damage; fire from burning oil tanks added to the destruction. Damage from strong ground motion itself was comparatively minor. Tectonic subsidence of about 3.6 feet resulted in low areas being inundated at high tide. Thirteen people were killed and five were injured as a result of the earthquake. Eighty-six houses were totally destroyed and 260 were heavily damaged. The harbor facilities were almost completely destroyed, and the entire economic base of the town was wiped out. The total cost to replace the destroyed public and private facilities was estimated at $22 million. Seward lies on the axis of the Chugach Mountains geosyncline. The main structural trend in the mapped area, where the rocks consist almost entirely of graywacke and phyllite, is from near north to N. 20° E. Beds and cleavage of the rocks commonly dip 70° W. or NW. to near vertical. Locally, the rocks are complexly folded or contorted. So major faults were found in the mapped area, but small faults, shear zones, and joints are common. Surficial deposits of the area hare been divided for mapping into the following units: drift deposits, alluvial fan deposits, valley alluvium, intertidal deposits, landslide deposits, and artificial fill. Most of these units intergrade and were deposited more or less contemporaneously. The drift deposits consist chiefly of till that forms moraines along the lower flanks of the Resurrection River valley and up tributary valleys. The till is predominantly silt and sand and lesser amounts of clay-size particles, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. Glacial outwash and stratified ice-contact deposits constitute the remainder of the drift deposits. Fans and fan-deltas have been deposited at the valley mouths of tributary streams. Some, including the one upon which Seward built, project into Resurrection Bay, and deltaic-type deposits form their distal edges. The larger fans—composed chiefly of loosely compacted and poorly sorted silt, sand, and gravel—form broad aprons having low gradients. The fan deposits range in thickness from about 100 feet to possibly several hundred feet and, at least in some places, lie on a platform of compact drift. Smaller fans at the mouths of several canyons have steep gradients and considerable local relief. Valley alluvium, deposited chiefly by the Resurrection River, consists mostly of coarse sand and fine to medium gravel. In the axial part of the valley it is probably more than 100 feet thick. Near the head of Resurrection Bay, the alluvium is underlain by at least 75 feet of marine deltaic sediments, which are in turn underlain by 600 or more feet of drift in the deepest part of the bedrock valley. Beach, deltaic, and estuarine sediments, deposited on intertidal flats at the head of the bay and along far1 margins that extend into the bay, arc mapped as intertidal deposits. They consist mostly of silt, sand, and fine gravel, and lesser amounts of clay-size particles. The earthquake reactivated old slides and trigged new ones in the mountains. Rock and snow avalanches, debris flows, and creep of talus deposits characterized slide activity on the steeper slops. The Seward waterfront had been extended before the earthquake by adding artificial fill consisting of loose sand and gravel; part of the lagoon area had been filled with refuse. After the earth- quake, fill, consisting of silt and sand dredged from the head of the bay, was pumped onto part of the lagoon area and also on land at the northwest corner of the bay. Response to the disaster was immediate and decisive. City, State, and Federal agencies, as well as other organizations and individuals, gave unstintingly of their time and facilities. Within a few days, there was temporary restoration of water, sewerage, and electrical facilities. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was authorized to select sites and construct a new dock for the Alaska Railroad, a new small-boat basin, and related facilities. The firm of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., under contract to the Corps of Engineers, investigated subsurface soils extensively to determine the factors responsible for the sliding along the Seward waterfront and to assist in site selection for reconstruction of the destroyed harbor facilities. Borings also made along the Seward waterfront and at the head of the bay, and laboratory tests were conducted on pertinent samples. These studies were augmented by geophysical studies both on land and in the bay. In addition, the Corps of Engineers made shallow borings on the intertidal flats at the head of the bay and performed pile-driving and load tests. Borings also were drilled and test pits were dug in the subdivision of Forest Acres. Sliding along the Seward waterfront markedly deepened the water along the former shoreline. Post-earthquake slopes of the bay floor immediately offshore also are steeper in places than before the earthquake. The strong ground motion of the earthquake triggered the landsliding, but several factors may have contributed to the magnitude and characteristics of the slides. These factors are: (1) the long duration of strong ground motion, (2) the grain size and texture of the material involved in the sliding, (3) the probability that the finer grained materials liquefied and flowed seaward, and (4) the added load of manmade facilities built on the edge of the shore, Secondary effects of the slides themselves—sudden drawdown of water, followed by the weight of returning waves—also may have contributed to the destruction. Submarine sliding at the northwest corner of the bay occurred in fine-grained deltaic deposits whose frontal slopes probably were in metastable equilibrium under static conditions. Uplift pressures from aquifers under hydrostatic head, combined with the probable liquefaction characteristics of the sediments when vibrated by strong ground motion, probably caused the material to slide and flow seaward as a heavy slurry. Under static conditions, no major shoreline or submarine landsliding is expected in the Seward area; in the event of another severe earthquake, however, additional sliding is likely along the Seward waterfront and also in the deltaic deposits at the northwest corner of the bay. Fractured ground in back of the present shoreline along the Seward waterfront is an area of incipient landslides that would be unstable under strong shaking. For this reason the Scientific and Engineering Task Force placed the area in a high-risk classification and recommended no repair, rehabilitation, or new construction in this area involving use of Federal funds; it was further recommended that the area should be reserved for park or other uses that do not involve large congregations of people. The deltaic deposits at the head of the bay probably also would be susceptible to sliding during another large earthquake. This sliding would result in further landward retreat of the present shoreline toward the new railroad dock. Specifications for the new dock, whose seaward end is now approximately 1,100 feet from the back scarp of the subaqueous landslide, require design pro- visions to withstand seismic shock up to certain limits. Earthquake-induced fracturing of the ground in the subdivision of Forest Acres was confined to the lower part of a broad alluvial fan. There, sewer and water lines were ruptured and the foundations of some homes were heavily damaged. Landsliding, such as occurred along the shoreline of the bay, was not a contributing cause of the fracturing. Two hypotheses are offered to explain the fracturing: 1. Seismic energy was transformed into visible surface waves of such amplitude that the strength of surface layer was exceeded and rupturing occurred; tensional and compressional stresses alternately opened and closed the fractures and forced out water and mud. 2. Compaction by vibration of the fine-grained deposits of the fan caused ground settlement and fracturing; ground water under temporary hydrostatic head was forced to the surface as fountains and carried the finer material with it. Water waves that crashed onto shore, while shaking was still continuing, were generated chiefly by onshore and offshore landsliding. Waves that overran the shores about 25 minutes after shaking stopped and that continued to arrive for the next several hours are believed to be seismic sea waves (tsunamis) that originated in an uplifted area in the Gulf of Alaska. During the time of seismic sea-wave activity and perhaps preceding it, seiche wares also may have been generated within Resurrection Bay and complicated the wave effects along the shoreline.

Alaska↗
USGS1973

Erosional and Depositional Aspects of Hurricane Camille in Virginia, 1969

Probably the worst natural disaster in central Virginia's recorded history was the flood resuiting from an 8-hour deluge of about 28 inches (710 mm) of rain on the night of August 19-20, 1969. This study examines some of the intensive sediment erosion and deposition that resulted from the storm and flood. Most of the 150 people whom the flood killed in this mountainous area died from broken bones and other blunt-force injuries, rather than by drowning. The transport of sediment and other debris by the water therefore was very significant in loss of life and in property damage. Erosion resulted mainly from debris avalanches down the mountain-sides and channel scour along streams and head-water tributaries. Total amounts of sediment yield from certain mountainous areas in Nelson County were about 3.2-4.6 million cubic feet per square mile, probably the equivalent of several thousand years of normal denudation. Characteristics of the debris avalanches were that (1) they usually followed pre-existing depressions on hillsides and occurred on slopes greater than 35 percent, (2) the upslope tip of the avalanche scar tended to be located at the steepest part of the hillside, where the convex slope merged with the concave or planar zone immediately below, (3) hillsides facing north, northeast and east were more susceptible to avalanching than slopes facing other directions, and (4) debris-avalanches caused rapid and devastating surges of water and sediment in the mountain-stream channels. Such surges in some instances temporarily blocked the channel flow upstream. Slightly more than half of the total sediment contributed to the stream system was from erosion of stream channels. Channel erosion was very irregularly distributed; some ravines 10-20 feet wide and 5-10 feet deep were scoured in places which formerly had only a very small channel, whereas other channels only a few hundred yards away experienced little or no channel erosion. By the use of figures for the total amount of sediment removed from a drainage basin and the duration of the storm, estimates were made of the storm-average sediment-transport rate at the mouth of various basins. For drainage basins ranging up to about 1.5 square miles, the estimated storm-average sediment-transport rates varied from practically nothing to as much as 172,000 pounds per second (7.4 million tons per day). The types of sediment deposits were (1) debris-avalanche deposits, rather rare, at the base of hillslopes, (2) mountain-stream channel deposits, usually in scattered sediment patches but locally occurring as large wedge-shaped deposits behind debris dams, (3) alluvial fans, (4) delta-like deposits at the junction of a stream and major highway, where water backed up during the flood due to plugging of a culvert, and (5) accretion deposits on flood plains. The highway deltas and some downstream flood-plain sediments consisted mostly of sand-sized grains, but the other types of deposits usually contained particles ranging from silt or clay to boulders 5-10 feet in diameter. Changes in grain size and in volume of deposition with distance downstream were measured, and sedimentary features of the various types of deposits are described.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2008

State of Florida 1:24,000- and 1:100,000-scale quadrangle index map - Highlighting low-lying areas derived from USGS Digital Elevation Models

In support of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) disaster preparedness efforts, this map depicts 1:24,000- and 1:100,000-scale quadrangle footprints over a color shaded relief representation of the State of Florida. The first 30 feet of relief above mean sea level are displayed as brightly colored 5-foot elevation bands, which highlight low-elevation areas at a coarse spatial resolution. Standard USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1 arc-second (nominally 30-meter) digital elevation model (DEM) data are the basis for the map, which is designed to be used at a broad scale and for informational purposes only. The NED source data for this map consists of a mixture of 30-meter- and 10-meter-resolution DEMs. The NED data were derived from the original 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic map bare-earth contours, which were converted into gridded quadrangle-based DEM tiles at a constant post spacing (grid cell size) of either 30 meters (data before the mid-1990s) or 10 meters (mid-1990s and later data). These individual-quadrangle DEMs were then converted to spherical coordinates (latitude/longitude decimal degrees) and edge-matched to ensure seamlessness. Figure 1 shows a similar representation for the entire U.S. Gulf Coast, using coarsened 30-meter NED data. Areas below sea level typically are surrounded by levees or some other type of flood-control structures. State and county boundary, hydrography, city, and road layers were modified from USGS National Atlas data downloaded in 2003. Quadrangle names, dated April, 2006, were obtained from the Federal Geographic Names Information System. The NED data were downloaded in 2004.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2008

Gulf of Mexico region — Highlighting low-lying areas derived from USGS Digital Elevation Data

In support of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) disaster preparedness efforts, this map depicts a color shaded relief representation of the area surrounding the Gulf of Mexico. The first 30 feet of relief above mean sea level are displayed as brightly colored 5-foot elevation bands, which highlight low-elevation areas at a coarse spatial resolution. Standard USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1 arc-second (nominally 30-meter) digital elevation model (DEM) data are the basis for the map, which is designed to be used at a broad scale and for informational purposes only. The NED data were derived from the original 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic map bare-earth contours, which were converted into gridded quadrangle-based DEM tiles at a constant post spacing (grid cell size) of either 30 meters (data before the mid-1990s data) or 10 meters (mid-1990s and later data). These individual-quadrangle DEMs were then converted to spherical coordinates (latitude/longitude decimal degrees) and edge-matched to ensure seamlessness. Approximately one-half of the area shown on this map has DEM source data at a 30-meter resolution, with the remaining half consisting of 10-meter contour-derived DEM data or higher-resolution LIDAR data. Areas below sea level typically are surrounded by levees or some other type of flood-control structures. State and county boundary, hydrography, city, and road layers were modified from USGS National Atlas data downloaded in 2003. The NED data were downloaded in 2005.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗
USGS2008

State of Louisiana - Highlighting low-lying areas derived from USGS Digital Elevation Data

In support of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) disaster preparedness efforts, this map depicts a color shaded relief representation highlighting the State of Louisiana and depicts the surrounding areas using muted elevation colors. The first 30 feet of relief above mean sea level are displayed as brightly colored 5-foot elevation bands, which highlight low-elevation areas at a coarse spatial resolution. Areas below sea level typically are surrounded by levees or some other type of flood-control structures. Standard USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1 arc-second (nominally 30-meter) digital elevation model (DEM) data are the basis for the map, which is designed to be used at a broad scale and for informational purposes only. The NED data are a mixture of data and were derived from the original 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic map bare-earth contours, which were converted into gridded quadrangle-based DEM tiles at a constant post spacing (grid cell size) of either 30 meters (data before the mid-1990s) or 10 meters (mid-1990s and later data). These individual-quadrangle DEMs were then converted to spherical coordinates (latitude/longitude decimal degrees) and edge-matched to ensure seamlessness. Approximately one-half of the area shown on this map has DEM source data at a 30-meter resolution, with the remaining half consisting of mostly 10-meter contour-derived DEM data and some small areas of higher-resolution LIght Detection And Ranging (LIDAR) data along parts of the coastline. Areas below sea level typically are surrounded by levees or some other type of flood-control structures. State and parish boundary, hydrography, city, and road layers were modified from USGS National Atlas data downloaded in 2003. The NED data were downloaded in 2007.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2008

State of Texas - Highlighting low-lying areas derived from USGS Digital Elevation Data

In support of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) disaster preparedness efforts, this map depicts a color shaded relief representation of Texas and a grayscale relief of the surrounding areas. The first 30 feet of relief above mean sea level are displayed as brightly colored 5-foot elevation bands, which highlight low-elevation areas at a coarse spatial resolution. Standard USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1 arc-second (nominally 30-meter) digital elevation model (DEM) data are the basis for the map, which is designed to be used at a broad scale and for informational purposes only. The NED data were derived from the original 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic map bare-earth contours, which were converted into gridded quadrangle-based DEM tiles at a constant post spacing (grid cell size) of either 30 meters (data before the mid-1990s) or 10 meters (mid-1990s and later data). These individual-quadrangle DEMs were then converted to spherical coordinates (latitude/longitude decimal degrees) and edge-matched to ensure seamlessness. The NED source data for this map consists of a mixture of 30-meter- and 10-meter-resolution DEMs. State and county boundary, hydrography, city, and road layers were modified from USGS National Atlas data downloaded in 2003. The NED data were downloaded in 2002. Shaded relief over Mexico was obtained from the USGS National Atlas.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2012

Flood-inundation maps for the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, Allenstown, and Chichester, New Hampshire

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 16.5-mile reach of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, Allenstown, and Chichester, N.H., from the confluence with the Merrimack River to U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Suncook River streamgage 01089500 at Depot Road in North Chichester, N.H., were created by the USGS in cooperation with the New Hampshire Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. The inundation maps presented in this report depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Suncook River at North Chichester, N.H. (station 01089500). The current conditions at the USGS streamgage may be obtained on the Internet (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nh/nwis/uv/?site_no=01089500&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060). The National Weather Service forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that are often collocated with USGS streamgages. Forecasted peak-stage information is available on the Internet at the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system site (http://water.weather.gov/ahps/) and may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. These maps along with real-time stream stage data from the USGS Suncook River streamgage (station 01089500) and forecasted stream stage from the NWS will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood-response activities, such as evacuations, road closures, disaster declarations, and post-flood recovery. The maps, along with current stream-stage data from the USGS Suncook River streamgage and forecasted stream-stage data from the NWS, can be accessed at the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/.

New Hampshire↗
USGS2013

Flood-inundation maps for the Saluda River from Old Easley Bridge Road to Saluda Lake Dam near Greenville, South Carolina

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 3.95-mile reach of the Saluda River from approximately 815 feet downstream from Old Easley Bridge Road to approximately 150 feet downstream from Saluda Lake Dam near Greenville, South Carolina, were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/, depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Saluda River near Greenville, South Carolina (station 02162500). Current conditions at the USGS streamgage may be obtained through the National Water Information System Web site at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/sc/nwis/uv/?site_no=02162500&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060,00062. The National Weather Service (NWS) forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that are often collocated with USGS streamgages. Forecasted peak-stage information is available on the Internet at the NWS Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system Web site (http://water.weather.gov/ahps/) and may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation.In this study, flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The model was calibrated using the most current stage-streamflow relations at USGS streamgage station 02162500, Saluda River near Greenville, South Carolina. The hydraulic model was then used to determine water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1.0-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from approximately bankfull to 2 feet higher than the highest recorded water level at the streamgage. The simulated water-surface profiles were then exported to a geographic information system, ArcGIS, and combined with a digital elevation model (derived from Light Detection and Ranging [LiDAR] data with a 0.6-foot vertical Root Mean Square Error [RMSE] and a 3.0-foot horizontal RMSE), using HEC-GeoRAS tools in order to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with real-time stage data from the USGS streamgage station 02162500 and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, can provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical during flood-response and flood-recovery activities, such as evacuations, road closures, and disaster declarations.

South Carolina↗
USGS2018

Water-table and potentiometric-surface altitudes in the upper glacial, Magothy, and Lloyd aquifers of Long Island, New York, April–May 2016

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State and local agencies, systematically collects groundwater data at varying measurement frequencies to monitor the hydrologic conditions on Long Island, New York. Each year during April and May, the U.S. Geological Survey completes a synoptic survey of water levels to define the spatial distribution of the water table and potentiometric surfaces within the three main water-bearing units underlying Long Island—the upper glacial, Magothy, and Lloyd aquifers—and the hydraulically connected Jameco and North Shore aquifers. These data and the maps constructed from them are commonly used in studies of the hydrology of Long Island and are used by water managers and suppliers for aquifer management and planning purposes. Water-level measurements made in 424 monitoring wells (observation and supply wells), 13 streamgages, and 2 lake gages across Long Island during April–May 2016 were used to prepare the maps in this report. Groundwater measurements were made by the wetted-tape or electric-tape method to the nearest hundredth of a foot. Contours of water-table and potentiometric-surface altitudes were created using the groundwater measurements. The water-table contours were interpreted using water-level data collected from 275 observation wells and 1 supply well screened in the upper glacial aquifer and the shallow Magothy aquifer and 13 streamgages and 2 lake gages. The potentiometric-surface contours of the Magothy aquifer were interpreted from measurements at 88 wells (61 observation wells and 27 supply wells) screened in the middle to deep Magothy aquifer and the contiguous and hydraulically connected Jameco aquifer. The potentiometric-surface contours of the Lloyd aquifer were interpreted from measurements at 60 wells (55 observation wells and 5 supply wells) screened in the Lloyd aquifer and the contiguous and hydraulically connected North Shore aquifer. Many of the supply wells are in continuous operation and, therefore, were turned off for a minimum of 24 hours before measurements were made to allow the water levels in the wells to recover to ambient (nonpumping) conditions. Full recovery time at some of these supply wells can exceed 24 hours; therefore, water levels measured at these wells are assumed to be less accurate than those measured at observation wells, which are not pumped. In addition to pumping stresses, density differences (saline water) also lower the water levels measured in certain wells. Recent water-quality data are lacking in these wells; therefore, a conversion to freshwater head could not be performed accurately and was not attempted. In this report, all water-level altitudes are referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29). The land surface altitude, or topography, was obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The data were collected using light detection and ranging (lidar) and were used to produce a three-dimensional digital elevation model. The lidar data have a horizontal accuracy of 1.38 feet and a vertical accuracy of 0.40 foot at a 95-percent confidence level for the “open terrain” land-cover category. The digital elevation model was developed jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Geological Survey as part of the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013. Land surface altitude is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). On Long Island, NAVD 88 is approximately 1 foot higher than NGVD 29. Hydrographs are included on these maps for selected wells that have continuous digital recording equipment, and each hydrograph includes the water level measured during the synoptic survey. These hydrographs are representative of the 2016 water year and show the changes throughout that period; a water year is the 12-month period from October 1 to September 30 and is designated by the year in which it ends.

New York↗
USGS2005

Effects of the 1998 Drought on the Freshwater Lens in the Laura Area, Majuro Atoll, Republic of the Marshall Islands

Lower than average rainfall during late 1997 and early 1998 in Majuro Atoll, Republic of the Marshall Islands, caused a drought and severe drinking-water shortage. Majuro depends on a public rainfall catchment system, which uses an airport runway and storage reservoirs. The storage reservoirs can supply water for about 30 to 50 days without replenishment. In February 1998, after a few months with less than one inch of rainfall per month, a drought-related disaster was declared. Reverse-osmosis water-purification systems were brought to Majuro to help alleviate the water shortage. Concurrent with the water-purification program, ground water from a freshwater lens in the Laura area of the atoll was pumped at increased rates. Of the total consumed water during this period, ground water from Laura supplied between 90 percent (March 1998) and 64 percent (May 1998) of the drinking water. Due to public concern, a study was initiated to determine the effects of the drought on the freshwater lens. The areal extent of the freshwater lens is about 350 acres. A monitoring-well network, consisting of multiple wells driven to varying depths at 11 sites, was installed to determine the thickness of the freshwater lens. Similar locations relative to an earlier study were chosen so that the data from this study could be compared to 1984-85 data. At the end of the drought in June 1998, the freshwater near the middle of the lens was about 45 feet thick; and at the north and south ends, the freshwater was about 25 to 38 feet thick, respectively. Monitoring of the freshwater lens was continued through the wet season following the drought. The lens increased in thickness by 1 to 8 feet after 7 months of rainfall. Greater increases in lens thickness were measured on the lagoon side than on the ocean side of the freshwater lens. Lens thickness during August 1998, and seasonal variation of lens thickness in 1998, were compared to data collected in 1984-85. Comparison of lens thickness from the different years yielded an inconsistent result; the lens was not uniformly thicker in 1984-85 despite more rainfall and little or no pumpage during this time. Seasonal variation in 1998-99 was greater than seasonal variation in 1984-85 due to differences in seasonal rainfall and pumpage. The change in lens thickness suggested by the comparison between 1998-99 and 1984-85 data was complicated by effects due to different well locations, different wells, and assumed small-scale variability in the thickness of fine and coarse calcareous sediments. This result suggests that a monitoring program that uses the same wells through time is needed to adequately describe long-term variability in lens thickness.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2006

Flood of July 12-13, 2004, Burlington and Camden Counties, South-Central New Jersey

Intense rainfall inundated south-central New Jersey on July 12-13, 2004, causing major flooding with heavy property, road, and bridge damage in Burlington and Camden Counties. Forty-five dams were topped or damaged, or failed completely. The affected areas were in the Rancocas Creek, Cooper River, and Pennsauken Creek Basins. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) documented peak stream elevations and flows at 56 selected sites within the affected area. With rainfall totals averaging more than 6 inches throughout the three basins, peak-of-record flood elevations and streamflows occurred at all but one USGS stream gage, where the previous record was tied. Flood-frequency recurrence-intervals ranged from 30 to greater than 100 years and maximum streamflow per square mile ranged from 13.9 to 263 cubic feet per second per square mile (ft3/s/mi2). Peak streamflow at USGS stream gages surrounding the affected basins are associated with considerably lower recurrence intervals and demonstrate the limited extent of the flood. A high tide of about 1 foot above monthly mean high tide did not contribute to high-water conditions. Low ground-water levels prior to the rainfall helped to mitigate flooding in the affected basins. Compared with historical floods in the Rancocas Creek Basin during 1938-40, the July 2004 flood had greater streamflow, but lower stream elevations. Property damage from the event was estimated at $50 million. Governor James E. McGreevy declared a State of Emergency in Burlington and Camden Counties on July 13, 2004. After assessment of the damage by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), President George W. Bush declared Burlington and Camden Counties disaster areas on July 16, 2004.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2006

The Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative (ARMI): 5-year report

The Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative (ARMI) is an innovative, multidisciplinary program that began in 2000 in response to a congressional directive for the Department of the Interior to address the issue of amphibian declines in the United States. ARMI’s formulation was cross-disciplinary, integrating U.S. Geological Survey scientists from Biology, Water, and Geography to develop a course of action (Corn and others, 2005a). The result has been an effective program with diverse, yet complementary, expertise. ARMI’s approach to research and monitoring is multiscale. Detailed investigations focus on a few species at selected local sites throughout the country; monitoring addresses a larger number of species over broader areas (typically, National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges); and inventories to document species occurrence are conducted more extensively across the landscape. Where monitoring is conducted, the emphasis is on an ability to draw statistically defensible conclusions about the status of amphibians. To achieve this objective, ARMI has instituted a monitoring response variable that has nationwide applicability. At research sites, ARMI focuses on studying species/environment interactions, determining causes of observed declines, and developing new techniques to sample populations and analyze data. Results from activities at all scales are provided to scientists, land managers, and policymakers, as appropriate. The ARMI program and the scientists involved contribute significantly to understanding amphibian declines at local, regional, national, and international levels. Within National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges, findings help land managers make decisions applicable to amphibian conservation. For example, the National Park Service (NPS) selected amphibians as a vital sign for several of their monitoring networks, and ARMI scientists provide information and assistance in developing monitoring methods for this NPS effort. At the national level, ARMI has had major exposure at a variety of meetings, including a dedicated symposium at the 2004 joint meetings of the Herpetologists’ League, the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, and the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Several principal investigators have brought international exposure to ARMI through venues such as the World Congress of Herpetology in South Africa in 2005 (invited presentation by Dr. Gary Fellers), the Global Amphibian Summit, sponsored by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Wildlife Conservation International, in Washington, D.C., 2005 (invited participation by Dr. P.S. Corn), and a special issue of the international herpetological journal Alytes focused on ARMI in 2004 (edited by Dr. C.K. Dodd, Jr.). ARMI research and monitoring efforts have addressed at least 7 of the 21 Threatened and Endangered Species listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (California red-legged frog [Rana draytonii], Chiricahua leopard frog [R. chiricahuensis], arroyo toad [Bufo californicus], dusky gopher frog [Rana sevosa], mountain yellow-legged frog [R. muscosa], flatwoods salamander [Ambystoma cingulatum], and the golden coqui [Eleutherodactylus jasperi]), and 9 additional species of concern recognized by the IUCN. ARMI investigations have addressed time-sensitive research, such as emerging infectious diseases and effects on amphibians related to natural disasters like wildfire, hurricanes, and debris flows, and the effects of more constant, environmental change, like urban expansion, road development, and the use of pesticides. Over the last 5 years, ARMI has partnered with an extensive list of government, academic, and private entities. These partnerships have been fruitful and have assisted ARMI in developing new field protocols and analytic tools, in using and refining emerging technologies to improve accuracy and efficiency of data handling, in conducting amphibian disease, malformation, and environmental effects research, and in implementing a network of monitoring and research sites. Accomplishments from these endeavors include more than 40 publications on amphibian status and trends, nearly 100 publications on amphibian ecology and causes of declines, and over 30 methodological publications. Several databases have emerged as a result of ARMI and its partnerships; one, a digital atlas of ranges for all U.S. amphibian species, was used by the IUCN to display amphibian distribution maps in the Global Amphibian Assessment Project. Given the scope of ARMI and the panoply of projects, findings have had implications for policy. Investigations that demonstrate amphibian declines or illuminate causes of declines provide valuable information about habitat management, environmental effects, mechanisms for the spread of disease, and human/amphibian interfaces. This information has been made available to land managers, scientists, educators, Congress and other policymakers, and the public. The support afforded ARMI by Congress has been influential in the program’s development and success. The value of ARMI’s efforts will continue to increase as we are able to extend our studies spatially and temporally to answer critical questions with more confidence. We are using ARMI’s resources efficiently and continuing to develop innovative mechanisms for leveraging resources for maximum effectiveness during challenging financial times. This report is a 5-year retrospective of the structure, methodology, progress, and contributions to the broader scientific community that have resulted from this national USGS program. We evaluate ARMI’s success to date, with regard to the challenges faced by the program and the strengths that have emerged. We chart objectives for the next 5 years that build on current accomplishments, highlight areas meriting further research, and direct efforts to overcome existing weaknesses.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2006

Peak Discharge, Flood Profile, Flood Inundation, and Debris Movement Accompanying the Failure of the Upper Reservoir at the Taum Sauk Pump Storage Facility near Lesterville, Missouri

The Taum Sauk pump-storage hydroelectric power plant located in Reynolds County, Missouri, uses turbines that operate as pumps and hydraulic head generated by discharging water from an upper to a lower reservoir to produce electricity. A 55-acre upper reservoir with a 1.5- billion gallon capacity was built on top of Proffit Mountain, approximately 760 feet above the floodplain of the East Fork Black River. At approximately 5:16 am on December 14, 2005, a 680-foot wide section of the upper reservoir embankment failed suddenly, sending water rushing down the western side of Proffit Mountain and emptying into the floodplain of East Fork Black River. Flood waters from the upper reservoir flowed downstream through Johnson's Shut-Ins State Park and into the lower reservoir of the East Fork Black River. Floods such as this present unique challenges and opportunities to analyze and document peak-flow characteristics, flood profiles, inundation extents, and debris movement. On December 16, 2005, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data were collected and used to support hydraulic analyses, forensic failure analyses, damage extent, and mitigation of future disasters. To evaluate the impact of sedimentation in the lower reservoir, a bathymetric survey conducted on December 22 and 23, 2005, was compared to a previous bathymetric survey conducted in April, 2005. Survey results indicated the maximum reservoir capacity difference of 147 acre-feet existed at a pool elevation of 730 feet. Peak discharge estimates of 289,000 cubic feet per second along Proffit Mountain and 95,000 cubic feet per second along the East Fork Black River were determined through indirect measurement techniques. The magnitude of the embankment failure flood along the East Fork Black River was approximately 4 times greater than the 100-year flood frequency estimate of 21,900 cubic feet per second, and approximately 3 times greater than the 500-year flood frequency estimate of 30,500 cubic feet per second. Dynamic wave unsteady flow models Dam Break (DAMBRK) and Unsteady NETwork (UNET) were used to route the flood wave from the embankment failure breach of the upper reservoir to the spillway of the lower reservoir. Simulated velocities ranged from 20 to 51 feet per second along Proffit Mountain and 12 to 32 feet per second along the East Fork Black River. Simulated arrival time of the flood wave took approximately 5.5 to 6.0 minutes to enter into the floodplain of the East Fork Black River, and roughly 29 minutes to begin filling the lower reservoir. Simulated shear stress values reached as high as 232 pounds per square foot along the slope of Proffit Mountain and 144 pounds per square foot within the Shut-Ins. Flood depths from the embankment failure may have reached greater than 50 feet along Proffit Mountain and as much as 30 to 40 feet along the East Fork Black River. A steady-state model was used to develop 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year flood frequency profiles along the East Fork Black River. A similar flood event, hypothetically resulting from a breach of the east embankment above Taum Sauk Creek, was simulated along with the 100- and 500-year flood profiles on Taum Sauk Creek. Estimated extents of flood inundation were developed for each profile. Debris movement was extensive as a result of the flood wave moving down Proffit Mountain and through Johnson's Shut-Ins State Park. A quantitative assessment of debris movement was conducted to benefit rehabilitation efforts within the park. Approximately 180 acres of timber were affected as a result of the embankment failure flood.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Flood of April 2-4, 2005, Delaware River Main Stem from Port Jervis, New York, to Cinnaminson, New Jersey

Several conditions, including saturated soils, snowmelt, and heavy rains, caused flooding on the Delaware River on April 2-4, 2005. The event occurred 50 years after the historic 1955 Delaware River flood, and only six months after a smaller but equally notable flood on September 18-19, 2004. The Delaware River flooded for a third time in 22 months in June, 2006. The peak flows and elevations of the 2005 flood were similar to those on June 28-29, 2006. The following report describes the April 2-4, 2005, Delaware River flood, and includes the associated precipitation amounts, peak flows and elevations, and flood frequencies. A comparison of historic Delaware River floods also is presented. The appendix of the report contains detailed information for 156 high-water mark elevations obtained on the main stem of the Delaware River from Port Jervis, New York, to Cinnaminson, New Jersey, for the April 2-4, 2005 flood. The April 2005 event originated with frequent precipitation from December 2004 to March 2005 which saturated the soils in the upper Delaware River Basin. The cold winter froze some of the soils and left a snowpack at higher elevations equivalent to as much as 10 inches of water in some areas. Temperatures rose above freezing, and heavy rains averaging 1 to 3 inches on March 27, 2005, melted some of the snow, causing the Delaware River to rise; however, peak elevations were still 2 to 7 feet below flood stage. Another round of rainfall averaging 2-5 inches in the basin on April 2, 2005, melted the remaining snowpack. The combination of snowmelt and runoff from the two storms produced flood conditions along the main stem of the Delaware River. Flood frequencies of flows at selected tributaries to the Delaware River did not exceed the 35-year recurrence intervals. The Delaware River main stem peak-flow recurrence intervals ranged from 40 to 80 years; flows were approximately 20 percent less than those from the peak of record in 1955. Peak elevations exceeded National Weather Service flood stages defined at continuous-record streamflow-gaging stations by 5 to 7 feet, but were on average 3 to 5 feet lower than the peak of record in August 1955. Peak elevations determined at 48 sites along the main stem of the Delaware River defined the flood profile between the gaging stations. The peak elevation in the tide-effected portion of the Delaware (downstream of Trenton, New Jersey), occurred on April 2, 2 days before the riverine peak, as a result of water pushed into the bay by a low-pressure system situated just off the coast. Every county located along the main stem of the Delaware River was declared a Federal disaster area. Property damage estimates in Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey exceeded $200 million.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Flood of June 22-24, 2006, in North-Central Ohio, With Emphasis on the Cuyahoga River Near Independence

Heavy rains caused severe flooding on June 22-24, 2006, and damaged approximately 4,580 homes and 48 businesses in Cuyahoga County. Damage estimates in Cuyahoga County for the two days of flooding exceed $47 million; statewide damage estimates exceed $150 million. Six counties (Cuyahoga, Erie, Huron, Lucas, Sandusky, and Stark) in northeast Ohio were declared Federal disaster areas. One death, in Lorain County, was attributed to the flooding. The peak streamflow of 25,400 cubic feet per second and corresponding peak gage height of 23.29 feet were the highest recorded at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamflow-gaging station Cuyahoga River at Independence (04208000) since the gaging station began operation in 1922, exceeding the previous peak streamflow of 24,800 cubic feet per second that occurred on January 22, 1959. An indirect calculation of the peak streamflow was made by use of a step-backwater model because all roads leading to the gaging station were inundated during the flood and field crews could not reach the station to make a direct measurement. Because of a statistically significant and persistent positive trend in the annual-peak-streamflow time series for the Cuyahoga River at Independence, a method was developed and applied to detrend the annual-peak-streamflow time series prior to the traditional log-Pearson Type III flood-frequency analysis. Based on this analysis, the recurrence interval of the computed peak streamflow was estimated to be slightly less than 100 years. Peak-gage-height data, peak-streamflow data, and recurrence-interval estimates for the June 22-24, 2006, flood are tabulated for the Cuyahoga River at Independence and 10 other USGS gaging stations in north-central Ohio. Because flooding along the Cuyahoga River near Independence and Valley View was particularly severe, a study was done to document the peak water-surface profile during the flood from approximately 2 miles downstream from the USGS streamflow-gaging station at Independence to approximately 2 miles upstream from the gaging station. High-water marks were identified and flagged in the field. Third-order-accuracy surveys were used to determine elevations of the high-water marks, and the data were tabulated and plotted.

Scientific Investigations Report↗