Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Weather and Forecasting”

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 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
USGS2016

Flood-inundation maps for the Yellow River at Plymouth, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 4.9-mile reach of the Yellow River at Plymouth, Indiana (Ind.), were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-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 05516500, Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind. Current conditions for estimating near-real-time areas of inundation using USGS streamgage information may be obtained on the Internet at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/uv?site_no=05516500 . In addition, information has been provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system ( http:/water.weather.gov/ahps/ ). The NWS AHPS forecasts flood hydrographs at many sites that are often collocated with USGS streamgages, including the Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind. NWS AHPS-forecast peak-stage information may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood and forecasts of flood hydrographs at this site. For this study, flood profiles were computed for the Yellow River reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the current stage-discharge relations at the Yellow River streamgage, in combination with the flood-insurance study for Marshall County (issued in 2011). The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to determine eight water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bankfull to the highest stage of the current stage-discharge rating curve. The 1-percent annual exceedance probability flood profile elevation (flood elevation with recurrence intervals within 100 years) is within the calibrated water-surface elevations for comparison. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used with a geographic information system (GIS) digital elevation model (DEM, derived from Light Detection and Ranging [lidar]) in order to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage 05516500, Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind., and forecast stream stages from the NWS AHPS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2023

Assessing snowpack stratigraphy accuracy based on different input data: Insights for operations avalanche forecasting

Avalanche forecasters and snow scientists use physically based snow stratigraphy models to fill spatial and temporal gaps in field-based snow profile observations. These models generate stratigraphy predictions using meteorological input from automated weather stations (AWS) or numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. The choice of input data is often determined by data availability or convenience instead of giving full consideration to the most appropriate source for a particular application. For example, while AWS may provide weather observations that better represent a particular site, they have large up-front costs and require specialized personnel to service and maintain. The goal of this study is to quantify the accuracy of snow stratigraphy produced by the SNOWPACK model driven by different input data, with a particular focus on cost-benefit analysis for operational avalanche forecasting. We generate modeled snow profiles at a field site in the Bridger Range of southwestern Montana, USA, using a) observations from an AWS at the field site and b) NWP output from the NOAA High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) model. Validation data consist of a season-long time series of 10 manual snow profiles. We use dynamic time-warping (DTW) to quantify the overall and grain-type categorized similarities between modeled and in-situ observed profiles that are collocated in time and in space. Based on the similarity results, we present a cost-benefit analysis that considers the cost of installing and maintaining an AWS alongside the improved representation of snow depth, grain size, and weak layer types.

Montana↗
USGS2019

Flood-inundation maps for Lake Champlain in Vermont and New York

In 2016, digital flood-inundation maps along the shoreline of Lake Champlain in Addison, Chittenden, Franklin, and Grand Isle Counties in Vermont and northern Clinton County in New York were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the International Joint Commission (IJC). This report discusses the creation of updated static digital flood-inundation mapping, in 2018, to include the entire shoreline of Lake Champlain in the United States. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science website at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent of flooding corresponding to selected water-surface elevations (stages) at the USGS lake gages on Lake Champlain. As a result of the record setting floods of May 2011 in Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River, the U.S. and Canadian governments requested that the IJC issue a reference for a study to identify how flood forecasting, preparedness, and mitigation could be improved in the Lake Champlain–Richelieu River Basin. The IJC submitted the Lake Champlain–Richelieu River Plan of Study to the governments of Canada and the United States in 2013. The flood-inundation maps in this study are one aspect of the task work outlined in the IJC 2013 Plan of Study. Wind and seiche effects (standing oscillating wave with a long wavelength) that can influence flooding along the Lake Champlain shoreline were not represented. The flood-inundation maps reflect 11 stages for Lake Champlain that are static for the entire area of the lake. Near-real-time stages at the USGS gages on Lake Champlain may be obtained from the USGS National Water Information System website at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ ( https://doi.org/10.5066/F7P55KJN ) or from the National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ . Updated static flood-inundation boundary extents were created for Lake Champlain in Franklin, Chittenden, Addison, Rutland, and Grand Isle Counties in Vermont and Clinton, Essex, and Washington Counties in New York by using recently acquired (2009, 2012, 2014, and 2015) light detection and ranging (lidar) data. The corresponding flood-inundation maps may be referenced to any of the four active USGS lake gages on Lake Champlain. Of these four active lake gages, USGS lake gage 04295000, Richelieu River (Lake Champlain) at Rouses Point, N.Y.; USGS lake gage 04294500, Lake Champlain at Burlington, Vt.; USGS lake gage 04279085 Lake Champlain north of Whitehall, N.Y.; and USGS lake gage 04294413, Lake Champlain at Port Henry, N.Y., only the Richelieu River (Lake Champlain) at Rouses Point, N.Y., gage also serves as a National Weather Service prediction location. Lake Champlain static flood-inundation map boundary extents corresponding to the May 2011 peak flood stage (103.20 feet [ft], National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 [NGVD 29], as recorded at the USGS Rouses Point lake gage, were compared to the flood-inundation area extents determined from satellite imagery for the May 2011 flood (which incorporated documented high-water marks from the flood of May 2011) and were found to be in good agreement. The May 2011 flood is the highest recorded lake water level (stage) at the Rouses Point, N.Y., and Burlington, Vt., lake gages. Flood stages greater than 101.5 ft (NGVD 29) exceed the “major flood stage” as defined by the National Weather Service for USGS lake gage 04295000. Updated digital elevation models (DEMs) were created from the recent lidar data for Lake Champlain in Vermont and New York. These DEMs were used in determining the flood-inundation boundary and associated depth grids for 11 flood stages at 0.5-ft or 1-ft intervals from 100.0 to 106.0 ft (NGVD 29) as referenced to the USGS lake gages. In addition, the May 2011 flood-inundation area for elevation 103.20 ft (NGVD 29) (102.77 ft, North American Vertical Datum of 1988) was determined from these updated DEMs. The availability of these maps, along with online information regarding current stages at the USGS lake gages and forecasted high-flow stages from the National Weather Service at USGS lake gage 04295000, Richelieu River (Lake Champlain) at Rouses Point, N.Y., will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

New York, Vermont↗
USGS2004

Forecasting for natural avalanches during spring opening of Going-to-the-Sun Road, Glacier National Park, Montana, USA

The annual spring opening of the Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier National Park presents a unique avalanche forecasting challenge. The highway traverses dozens of avalanche paths mid-track in a 23-kilometer section that crosses the Continental Divide. Workers removing seasonal snow and avalanche debris are exposed to paths that can produce avalanches of destructive class 4. The starting zones for most slide paths are within proposed Wilderness, and explosive testing or control are not currently used. Spring weather along the Divide is highly variable; rain-on-snow events are common, storms can bring several feet of new snow as late as June, and temperature swings can be dramatic. Natural avalanches - dry and wet slab, dry and wet loose, and glide avalanches - present a wide range of hazards and forecasting issues. This paper summarizes the forecasting program instituted in 2002 for the annual snow removal operations. It focuses on tools and techniques for forecasting natural wet snow avalanches by incorporating two case studies, including a widespread climax wet slab cycle in 2003. We examine weather and snowpack conditions conducive to wet snow avalanches, indicators for instability, and suggest a conceptual model for wet snow stability in a northern intermountain snow climate.

Montana↗
USGS2004

A resampling procedure for generating conditioned daily weather sequences

A method is introduced to generate conditioned daily precipitation and temperature time series at multiple stations. The method resamples data from the historical record “nens” times for the period of interest (nens = number of ensemble members) and reorders the ensemble members to reconstruct the observed spatial (intersite) and temporal correlation statistics. The weather generator model is applied to 2307 stations in the contiguous United States and is shown to reproduce the observed spatial correlation between neighboring stations, the observed correlation between variables (e.g., between precipitation and temperature), and the observed temporal correlation between subsequent days in the generated weather sequence. The weather generator model is extended to produce sequences of weather that are conditioned on climate indices (in this case the Niño 3.4 index). Example illustrations of conditioned weather sequences are provided for a station in Arizona (Petrified Forest, 34.8°N, 109.9°W), where El Niño and La Niña conditions have a strong effect on winter precipitation. The conditioned weather sequences generated using the methods described in this paper are appropriate for use as input to hydrologic models to produce multiseason forecasts of streamflow.

Water Resources Research↗
USGS2018

Flood-inundation maps for the Wabash River at Lafayette, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for an approximately 4.8-mile reach of the Wabash River at Lafayette, Indiana (Ind.) were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science web site at https://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at USGS streamgage 03335500, Wabash River at Lafayette, Ind. Current streamflow conditions for estimating near-real-time areas of inundation using USGS streamgage information may be obtained on the internet at https://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/uv?site_no=03335500 . In addition, information has been provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system ( https://water.weather.gov/ahps/ ). The NWS AHPS forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that are often colocated with USGS streamgages, including the Wabash River at Lafayette, Ind. NWS AHPS-forecast peak-stage information may be used with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. For this study, flood profiles were computed for the Wabash River reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the most current stage-discharge relations at USGS streamgage 03335500, Wabash River at Lafayette, Ind., and high-water marks from the flood of July 2003 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], 2007). The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to determine 23 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bankfull to the highest stage of the current stage-discharge rating curve. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model derived from light detection and ranging to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage 03335500, Wabash River at Lafayette, Ind., and forecasted high-flow stages from the NWS AHPS, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood-response activities such as evacuations and road closures, and for postflood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2022

Collaborative hubs: Making the most of predictive epidemic modeling

The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear that epidemic models play an important role in how governments and the public understand and respond to infectious disease crises. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, models were used first to estimate the true number of infections, then to provide estimates of key parameters, to generate short-term forecasts of outbreak trends, and to quantify the possible effects of different interventions on the unfolding epidemic. In contrast to the central coordinating role played by major national or international agencies in weather-related emergencies, pandemic modeling efforts were initially scattered across many individual research institutions and academic groups. Differences in modeling approaches and assumptions of each individual effort led to contrasting results that at times contributed to confusion in public perception of the pandemic. For this reason, recent efforts to publicly coordinate modeling efforts in so-called “hubs” have provided governments, public health partners, and the public with assessments and forecasts that reflect the consensus (or lack thereof) in the modeling community. This has been achieved by openly and transparently synthesizing uncertainties across different individual modeling approaches and facilitating comparisons between them.

American Journal of Public Health↗
USGS2023

Operationalizing crop model data assimilation for improved on-farm situational awareness

The ability of ‘digital agriculture’ to support on-farm decision making is predicated on the real-time combination of observations and prior knowledge into an integrated digital environment. The mathematical discipline that seeks to provide this integration is known as model data assimilation (DA), with demonstrated benefits including improved predictive reliability, and the capacity to identify unexpected changes in field conditions and potential measurement errors. Despite routine adoption in other fields, the delayed adoption of DA in agriculture is due to the need to express end-of-season outcomes such as yield, update forecasts of these outcomes throughout the growing season as data become available, and enhance forecast reliability. To overcome these challenges, three guiding principles are introduced, providing a means to operationalize crop model DA for robust on-farm decision support. We apply the guiding principles using a South Australian viticulture case study. Our case study involves application of an iterative form of a widely used DA algorithm (ensemble Kalman filter) to dynamically update both static parameters and states associated with a grapevine simulation model. Daily weather data as well as fortnightly ground-based leaf area index (LAI) data are used for assimilation. It is shown how crop model DA can lead to not only significant improvements in forecasts of LAI but also to forecasts of end-of-season yield. The guiding principles also enable observations of greatest value to be identified throughout the season. This study highlights the role that formal crop model DA can play in agricultural decision support through enhancing situational awareness in real time.

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology↗
USGS2012

Flood-inundation maps for Peachtree Creek from the Norfolk Southern Railway bridge to the Moores Mill Road NW bridge, Atlanta, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 5.5-mile reach of the Peachtree Creek from the Norfolk Southern Railway bridge to the Moores Mill Road NW bridge, were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the City of Atlanta, Georgia. 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 Peachtree Creek at Atlanta, Georgia (02336300) and the USGS streamgage at Chattahoochee River at Georgia 280, near Atlanta, Georgia (02336490). Current water level (stage) at these USGS streamgages may be obtained at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ and can be used in conjunction with these maps to estimate near real-time areas of inundation. The National Weather Service (NWS) is incorporating results from this study into the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood warning system (http:/water.weather.gov/ahps/). The NWS forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that commonly are collocated at USGS streamgages. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgage at Peachtree Creek, which is available through the AHPS Web site, may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. A one-dimensional step-backwater model was developed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC–RAS software for a 6.5-mile reach of Peachtree Creek and was used to compute flood profiles for a 5.5-mile reach of the creek. The model was calibrated using the most current stage-discharge relations at the Peachtree Creek at Atlanta, Georgia, streamgage (02336300), and the Chattahoochee River at Georgia 280, near Atlanta, Georgia, streamgage (02336490) as well as high water marks collected during the 2010 annual peak flow event. The hydraulic model was then used to determine 50 water-surface profiles. The profiles are for 10 flood stages at the Peachtree Creek streamgage at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from just above bankfull stage (15.0 feet) to approximately the highest recorded water level at the streamgage (24.0 feet). At each stage on Peachtree Creek, five stages at the Chattahoochee River streamgage, from 26.4 feet to 38.4 feet in 3-foot intervals, were used to determine backwater effects. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model—derived from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data having a 0.3-foot vertical and 16.4-foot horizontal resolution—to delineate the area flooded for each 1-foot increment of stream stage. The availability of these maps, when combined with real-time information regarding current stage from USGS streamgages and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, provide emergency management personnel and residents with critical information during flood response activities, such as evacuations and road closures as well as for postflood-recovery efforts.

Georgia↗
USGS2013

Flood-inundation maps for the Wabash River at Terre Haute, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.3-mi reach of the Wabash River from 0.1 mi downstream of the Interstate 70 bridge to 1.1 miles upstream of the Route 63 bridge, Terre Haute, Indiana, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Department of Transportation. 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 of flooding corresponding to select water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage Wabash River at Terre Haute (station number 03341500). Current conditions at the USGS streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/uv/?site_no=03341500&agency_cd=USGS&p"). In addition, the same data are provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood warning system (http://water.weather.gov/ahps//). Within this system, the NWS forecasts flood hydrographs for the Wabash River at Terre Haute that 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-discharge relation at the Wabash River at the Terre Haute streamgage. The hydraulic model was then used to compute 22 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-ft interval referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bank-full to approximately the highest recorded water level at the streamgage. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model (derived from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data having a 0.37-ft vertical accuracy and a 1.02-ft horizontal accuracy) to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps along with Internet information regarding the current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted stream stages from the NWS can provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures as well as for post flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2007

National volcanic ash operations plan for aviation

The National Aviation Weather Program Strategic Plan (1997) and the National Aviation Weather Initiatives (1999) both identified volcanic ash as a high-priority informational need to aviation services. The risk to aviation from airborne volcanic ash is known and includes degraded engine performance (including flameout), loss of visibility, failure of critical navigational and operational instruments, and, in the worse case, loss of life. The immediate costs for aircraft encountering a dense plume are potentially major—damages up to $80 million have occurred to a single aircraft. Aircraft encountering less dense volcanic ash clouds can incur longer-term costs due to increased maintenance of engines and external surfaces. The overall goal, as stated in the Initiatives, is to eliminate encounters with ash that could degrade the in-flight safety of aircrews and passengers and cause damage to the aircraft. This goal can be accomplished by improving the ability to detect, track, and forecast hazardous ash clouds and to provide adequate warnings to the aviation community on the present and future location of the cloud. To reach this goal, the National Aviation Weather Program established three objectives: (1) prevention of accidental encounters with hazardous clouds; (2) reduction of air traffic delays, diversions, or evasive actions when hazardous clouds are present; and (3) the development of a single, worldwide standard for exchange of information on airborne hazardous materials. To that end, over the last several years, based on numerous documents (including an OFCMsponsored comprehensive study on aviation training and an update of Aviation Weather Programs/Projects), user forums, and two International Conferences on Volcanic Ash and Aviation Safety (1992 and 2004), the Working Group for Volcanic Ash (WG/VA), under the OFCM-sponsored Committee for Aviation Services and Research, developed the National Volcanic Ash Operations Plan for Aviation and Support of the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) International Airways Volcano Watch. This plan defines agency responsibilities, provides a comprehensive description of an interagency standard for volcanic ash products and their formats, describes the agency backup procedures for operational products, and outlines the actions to be taken by each agency following an occurrence of a volcanic eruption that subsequently affects and impacts aviation services. Since our most recent International Conference on Volcanic Ash and Aviation Safety, volcanic ash-related product and service activities have grown considerably along with partnerships and alliances throughout the aviation community. In January 2005, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Centers for Environment Prediction began running the Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model in place of the Volcanic Ash Forecast Transport and Dispersion (VAFTAD) model, upgrading support to the volcanic ash advisory community. Today, improvements to the HYSPLIT model are ongoing based on recommendations by the OFCM-sponsored Joint Action Group for the Selection and Evaluation of Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion Models and the Joint Action Group for Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion Modeling (Research and Development Plan). Two international workshops on volcanic ash have already taken place, noticeable improvements and innovations in education, training, and outreach have been made, and federal and public education and training programs on volcanic ash-related products, services, and procedures iv continue to evolve. For example, in partnership with Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and other academic institutions, volcanic ash hazard and mitigation training has been incorporated into aviation meteorology courses. As an essential next step, our volcanic ash-related efforts in the near term will be centered on the development of an interagency implementation plan to document and address the most critical needs of the volcanic ash advisory community. This interagency plan, developed as the result of the cooperative efforts of six federal agencies, follows the guidelines in support of the ICAO International Airways Volcano Watch. The signatories on the next page are committed to volcanic ash operations for aviation and will work toward full implementation through agency programs, initiatives, and procedures. I extend my sincere thanks to all members of the WG/VA, subject-matter experts, and to my staff for their collaborative and cooperative efforts in developing this first-ever national volcanic ash operations plan.

Report↗
USGS2013

Development of flood profiles and flood-inundation maps for the Village of Killbuck, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps for a reach of Killbuck Creek near the Village of Killbuck, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Holmes County, Ohio. The inundation maps depict estimates of the areal extent of flooding corresponding to water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage Killbuck Creek near Killbuck (03139000) and were completed as part of an update to Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood-Insurance Study. The maps were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning system that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. The digital maps also have been submitted for inclusion in the data libraries of the USGS interactive Flood Inundation Mapper. Data from the streamgage can be used by emergency-management personnel, in conjunction with the flood-inundation maps, to help determine a course of action when flooding is imminent. Flood profiles for selected reaches were prepared by calibrating a steady-state step-backwater model to an established streamgage rating curve. The step-backwater model then was used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for 10 flood stages at the streamgage with corresponding streamflows ranging from approximately the 50- to 0.2-percent annual exceedance probabilities. The computed flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate flood-inundation areas.

Ohio↗
USGS2009

Development of a Flood-Warning System and Flood-Inundation Mapping for the Blanchard River in Findlay, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps of the Blanchard River in Findlay, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the City of Findlay, Ohio. The maps, which correspond to water levels at the USGS streamgage at Findlay (04189000), were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning system that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. The USGS reestablished one streamgage and added another on the Blanchard River upstream of Findlay. Additionally, the USGS established one streamgage each on Eagle and Lye Creeks, tributaries to the Blanchard River. The stream-gage sites were equipped with rain gages and multiple forms of telemetry. Data from these gages can be used by emergency management personnel to determine a course of action when flooding is imminent. Flood profiles computed by means of a step-backwater model were prepared and calibrated to a recent flood with a return period exceeding 100 years. The hydraulic model was then used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for 11 flood stages with corresponding streamflows ranging from approximately 2 to 100 years in recurrence interval. The simulated flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate the flood-inundation areas. Maps of Findlay showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs are presented for the selected floods.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

Development of a flood-warning network and flood-inundation mapping for the Blanchard River in Ottawa, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps of the Blanchard River in Ottawa, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Village of Ottawa, Ohio. The maps, which correspond to water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Ottawa (USGS streamgage site number 04189260), were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning Network that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. Flood profiles were computed by means of a step-backwater model calibrated to recent field measurements of streamflow. The step-backwater model was then used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for 12 flood stages with corresponding streamflows ranging from less than the 2-year and up to nearly the 500-year recurrence-interval flood. The computed flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate flood-inundation areas. Maps of the Village of Ottawa showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs are presented for the selected floods. As part of this flood-warning network, the USGS upgraded one streamgage and added two new streamgages, one on the Blanchard River and one on Riley Creek, which is tributary to the Blanchard River. The streamgage sites were equipped with both satellite and telephone telemetry. The telephone telemetry provides dual functionality, allowing village officials and the public to monitor current stage conditions and enabling the streamgage to call village officials with automated warnings regarding flood stage and/or predetermined rates of stage increase. Data from the streamgages serve as a flood warning that emergency management personnel can use in conjunction with the flood-inundation maps by to determine a course of action when flooding is imminent.

Ohio↗
USGS2012

Development of a flood-warning system and flood-inundation mapping in Licking County, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps for selected reaches of South Fork Licking River, Raccoon Creek, North Fork Licking River, and the Licking River in Licking County, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Transportation; U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; and the City of Newark and Village of Granville, Ohio. The inundation maps depict estimates of the areal extent of flooding corresponding to water levels (stages) at the following USGS streamgages: South Fork Licking River at Heath, Ohio (03145173); Raccoon Creek below Wilson Street at Newark, Ohio (03145534); North Fork Licking River at East Main Street at Newark, Ohio (03146402); and Licking River near Newark, Ohio (03146500). The maps were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning system that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. As part of the flood-warning streamflow network, the USGS re-installed one streamgage on North Fork Licking River, and added three new streamgages, one each on North Fork Licking River, South Fork Licking River, and Raccoon Creek. Additionally, the USGS upgraded a lake-level gage on Buckeye Lake. Data from the streamgages and lake-level gage can be used by emergency-management personnel, in conjunction with the flood-inundation maps, to help determine a course of action when flooding is imminent. Flood profiles for selected reaches were prepared by calibrating steady-state step-backwater models to selected, established streamgage rating curves. The step-backwater models then were used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for up to 10 flood stages at a streamgage with corresponding streamflows ranging from approximately the 50 to 0.2-percent chance annual-exceedance probabilities for each of the 4 streamgages that correspond to the flood-inundation maps. The computed flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate flood-inundation areas. Maps of Licking County showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs are presented for the selected floods. The USGS also developed an unsteady-flow model for a reach of South Fork Licking River for use by the NWS to enhance their ability to provide advanced flood warning in the region north of Buckeye Lake, Ohio. The unsteady-flow model was calibrated based on data from four flooding events that occurred from June 2008 to December 2011. Model calibration was approximate due to the fact that there were unmeasured inflows to the river that were not able to be considered during the calibration. Information on unmeasured inflow derived from NWS hydrologic models and additional flood-event data could enable the NWS to further refine the unsteady-flow model.

Ohio↗
USGS2025

Density dependence and weather drive dabbling duck spatiotemporal distributions and intercontinental migration

Understanding migratory waterfowl spatiotemporal distributions is important because, in addition to their economic and cultural value, wild waterfowl can be infectious reservoirs of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV). Waterfowl migration has been implicated in regional and intercontinental HPAIV dispersal, and predictive capabilities of where and when HPAIV may be introduced to susceptible spillover hosts would facilitate biosecurity and mitigation efforts. To develop forecasts for HPAIV dispersal, an improved understanding of how individual birds interact with their environment and move on a landscape scale is required. Using an agent-based modeling approach, we integrated individual-scale energetics, species-specific morphology and behavior, and landscape-scale weather and habitat data in a mechanistic stochastic framework to simulate Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) and Northern Pintail ( Anas acuta ) annual migration across the Northern Hemisphere. Our model recreated biologically realistic migratory patterns using a first principles approach to waterfowl ecology, behavior, and physiology. Conducting a limited structural sensitivity analysis comparing reduced models to eBird Status and Trends in reference to the full model, we identified density dependence as the main factor influencing spring migration and breeding distributions, and wind as the main factor influencing fall migration and overwintering distributions. We show evidence of weather patterns in Northeast Asia causing significant intercontinental pintail migration to North America. By linking individual energetics to landscape-scale processes, we identify key drivers of waterfowl migration while developing a predictive model responsive to daily weather patterns. This model paves the way for future waterfowl migration research predicting HPAIV transmission, climate change impacts, and oil spill effects.

Avian Research↗
USGS2012

Flood-inundation maps for Sweetwater Creek from above the confluence of Powder Springs Creek to the Interstate 20 bridge, Cobb and Douglas Counties, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 10.5-mile reach of Sweetwater Creek, from about 1,800 feet above the confluence of Powder Springs Creek to about 160 feet below the Interstate 20 bridge, were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with Cobb County, Georgia. 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 Sweetwater Creek near Austell, Georgia (02337000). Current stage at this USGS streamgage may be obtained at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ and can be used in conjunction with these maps to estimate near real-time areas of inundation. The National Weather Service (NWS) is incorporating results from this study into the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system (http://water.weather.gov/ahps/). The NWS forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that commonly are collocated at USGS streamgages. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgage at Sweetwater Creek near Austell (02337000), which is available through the AHPS Web site, may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. A one-dimensional step-backwater model was developed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC–RAS) software for Sweetwater Creek and was used to compute flood profiles for a 10.5-mile reach of the creek. The model was calibrated using the most current stage-discharge relations at the Sweetwater Creek near Austell streamgage (02337000), as well as high-water marks collected during annual peak-flow events in 1982 and 2009. The hydraulic model was then used to determine 21 water-surface profiles for flood stages at the Sweetwater Creek streamgage at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from just above bankfull stage (12.0 feet) to approximately 1.2 feet above the highest recorded water level at the streamgage (32.0 feet). The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model—derived from contour data (8-foot horizontal resolution), in Cobb County, and USGS National Elevation Dataset (31-foot horizontal resolution), in Douglas County—to delineate the area flooded for each 1-foot increment of stream stage. The availability of these maps, when combined with real-time information regarding current stage from USGS streamgages and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with critical information during flood-response activities, such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Georgia↗
USGS2012

Flood-inundation maps for Suwanee Creek from the confluence of Ivy Creek to the Noblin Ridge Drive bridge, Gwinnett County, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.9-mile reach of Suwanee Creek, from the confluence of Ivy Creek to the Noblin Ridge Drive bridge, were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with Gwinnett County, Georgia. 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 Suwanee Creek at Suwanee, Georgia (02334885). Current stage at this USGS streamgage may be obtained at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ and can be used in conjunction with these maps to estimate near real-time areas of inundation. The National Weather Service (NWS) is incorporating results from this study into the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system ( http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ ). The NWS forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that commonly are collocated at USGS streamgages. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgage at Suwanee Creek at Suwanee (02334885), available through the AHPS Web site, may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. A one-dimensional step-backwater model was developed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS software for Suwanee Creek and was used to compute flood profiles for a 6.9-mile reach of the creek. The model was calibrated using the most current stage-discharge relations at the Suwanee Creek at Suwanee streamgage (02334885). The hydraulic model was then used to determine 19 water-surface profiles for flood stages at the Suwanee Creek streamgage at 0.5-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage. The profiles ranged from just above bankfull stage (7.0 feet) to approximately 1.7 feet above the highest recorded water level at the streamgage (16.0 feet). The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model - derived from light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data having a 5.0-foot horizontal resolution - to delineate the area flooded for each 0.5-foot increment of stream stage. The availability of these maps, when combined with real-time stage information from USGS streamgages and forecasted stream stage from the NWS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with critical information during flood-response activities, such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Georgia↗