Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

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 415 records · Page 23Linked to original sources
USGS2009

The framework of a coastal hazards model: A tool for predicting the impact of severe storms

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project in Southern California (Jones and others, 2007) is a five-year project (FY2007-FY2011) integrating multiple USGS research activities with the needs of external partners, such as emergency managers and land-use planners, to produce products and information that can be used to create more disaster-resilient communities. The hazards being evaluated include earthquakes, landslides, floods, tsunamis, wildfires, and coastal hazards. For the Coastal Hazards Task of the Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project in Southern California, the USGS is leading the development of a modeling system for forecasting the impact of winter storms threatening the entire Southern California shoreline from Pt. Conception to the Mexican border. The modeling system, run in real-time or with prescribed scenarios, will incorporate atmospheric information (that is, wind and pressure fields) with a suite of state-of-the-art physical process models (that is, tide, surge, and wave) to enable detailed prediction of currents, wave height, wave runup, and total water levels. Additional research-grade predictions of coastal flooding, inundation, erosion, and cliff failure will also be performed. Initial model testing, performance evaluation, and product development will be focused on a severe winter-storm scenario developed in collaboration with the Winter Storm Working Group of the USGS Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project in Southern California. Additional offline model runs and products will include coastal-hazard hindcasts of selected historical winter storms, as well as additional severe winter-storm simulations based on statistical analyses of historical wave and water-level data. The coastal-hazards model design will also be appropriate for simulating the impact of storms under various sea level rise and climate-change scenarios. The operational capabilities of this modeling system are designed to provide emergency planners with the critical information they need to respond quickly and efficiently and to increase public safety and mitigate damage associated with powerful coastal storms. For instance, high resolution local models will predict detailed wave heights, breaking patterns, and current strengths for use in warning systems for harbor-mouth navigation and densely populated coastal regions where beach safety is threatened. The offline applications are intended to equip coastal managers with the information needed to manage and allocate their resources effectively to protect sections of coast that may be most vulnerable to future severe storms.

California↗
USGS2009

Floods of August 21-24, 2007, in Northwestern and North-Central Ohio

Heavy rains in northwestern and north-central Ohio on August 19-22, 2007, caused severe flooding and widespread damages to residential, public, and commercial structures in the communities of Bluffton, Bucyrus, Carey, Columbus Grove, Crestline, Findlay, Mansfield, Ottawa, and Shelby. On August 27, 2007, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a notice of a Presidential declaration of a major disaster affecting Allen, Crawford, Hancock, Hardin, Putnam, Richland, Seneca, and Wyandot Counties as a result of the severe flooding. Rainfall totals for most of the flooded area were 3 to 5 in., with some locations reporting as much as 8 to 10 in. Three National Weather Service (NWS) gages in the area indicated a rainfall recurrence interval of greater than 1,000 years, and two indicated a recurrence interval between 500 and 1,000 years. Total damages are estimated at approximately $290 million, with 8,205 residences registering for financial assistance. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) computed flood recurrence intervals for peak streamflows at 22 streamgages and 8 ungaged sites in and around the area of major flooding. The peak streamflows at Sandusky River near Bucyrus streamgage and at seven of the eight ungaged sites had estimated recurrence intervals of greater than 500 years. The USGS located and surveyed 421 high-water marks and plotted high-water profiles for approximately 44.5 miles of streams throughout the nine communities.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Estimating Casualties for Large Earthquakes Worldwide Using an Empirical Approach

We developed an empirical country- and region-specific earthquake vulnerability model to be used as a candidate for post-earthquake fatality estimation by the U.S. Geological Survey's Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response (PAGER) system. The earthquake fatality rate is based on past fatal earthquakes (earthquakes causing one or more deaths) in individual countries where at least four fatal earthquakes occurred during the catalog period (since 1973). Because only a few dozen countries have experienced four or more fatal earthquakes since 1973, we propose a new global regionalization scheme based on idealization of countries that are expected to have similar susceptibility to future earthquake losses given the existing building stock, its vulnerability, and other socioeconomic characteristics. The fatality estimates obtained using an empirical country- or region-specific model will be used along with other selected engineering risk-based loss models for generation of automated earthquake alerts. These alerts could potentially benefit the rapid-earthquake-response agencies and governments for better response to reduce earthquake fatalities. Fatality estimates are also useful to stimulate earthquake preparedness planning and disaster mitigation. The proposed model has several advantages as compared with other candidate methods, and the country- or region-specific fatality rates can be readily updated when new data become available.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Volcano-Monitoring Instrumentation in the United States, 2008

The United States is one of the most volcanically active countries in the world. According to the global volcanism database of the Smithsonian Institution, the United States (including its Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) is home to about 170 volcanoes that are in an eruptive phase, have erupted in historical time, or have not erupted recently but are young enough (eruptions within the past 10,000 years) to be capable of reawakening. From 1980 through 2008, 30 of these volcanoes erupted, several repeatedly. Volcano monitoring in the United States is carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Volcano Hazards Program, which operates a system of five volcano observatories-Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO), Cascades Volcano Observatory (CVO), Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (HVO), Long Valley Observatory (LVO), and Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO). The observatories issue public alerts about conditions and hazards at U.S. volcanoes in support of the USGS mandate under P.L. 93-288 (Stafford Act) to provide timely warnings of potential volcanic disasters to the affected populace and civil authorities. To make efficient use of the Nation's scientific resources, the volcano observatories operate in partnership with universities and other governmental agencies through various formal agreements. The Consortium of U.S. Volcano Observatories (CUSVO) was established in 2001 to promote scientific cooperation among the Federal, academic, and State agencies involved in observatory operations. Other groups also contribute to volcano monitoring by sponsoring long-term installation of geophysical instruments at some volcanoes for specific research projects. This report describes a database of information about permanently installed ground-based instruments used by the U.S. volcano observatories to monitor volcanic activity (unrest and eruptions). The purposes of this Volcano-Monitoring Instrumentation Database (VMID) are to (1) document the Nation's existing, ground-based, volcano-monitoring capabilities, (2) answer queries within a geospatial framework about the nature of the instrumentation, and (3) provide a benchmark for planning future monitoring improvements. The VMID is not an archive of the data collected by monitoring instruments, nor is it intended to keep track of whether a station is temporarily unavailable due to telemetry or equipment problems. Instead, it is a compilation of basic information about each instrument such as location, type, and sponsoring agency. Typically, instruments installed expressly for volcano monitoring are emplaced within about 20 kilometers (km) of a volcanic center; however, some more distant instruments (as far away as 100 km) can be used under certain circumstances and therefore are included in the database. Not included is information about satellite-based and airborne sensors and temporarily deployed instrument arrays, which also are used for volcano monitoring but do not lend themselves to inclusion in a geospatially organized compilation of sensor networks. This Open-File Report is provided in two parts: (1) an Excel spreadsheet (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1165/) containing the version of the Volcano-Monitoring Instrumentation Database current through 31 December 2008 and (2) this text (in Adobe PDF format), which serves as metadata for the VMID. The disclaimer for the VMID is in appendix 1 of the text. Updated versions of the VMID will be posted on the Web sites of the Consortium of U.S. Volcano Observatories (http://www.cusvo.org/) and the USGS Volcano Hazards Program http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/activity/data/index.php.

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, New↗
USGS2010

USGS-WHOI-DPRI Coulomb Stress-Transfer Model for the January 12, 2010, MW=7.0 Haiti Earthquake

Using calculated stress changes to faults surrounding the January 12, 2010, rupture on the Enriquillo Fault, and the current (January 12 to 26, 2010) aftershock productivity, scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), and Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University (DPRI) have made rough estimates of the chance of a magnitude (Mw)=7 earthquake occurring during January 27 to February 22, 2010, in Haiti. The probability of such a quake on the Port-au-Prince section of the Enriquillo Fault is about 2 percent, and the probability for the section to the west of the January 12, 2010, rupture is about 1 percent. The stress changes on the Septentrional Fault in northern Haiti are much smaller, although positive.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Documentation for initial seismic hazard maps for Haiti

In response to the urgent need for earthquake-hazard information after the tragic disaster caused by the moment magnitude (M) 7.0 January 12, 2010, earthquake, we have constructed initial probabilistic seismic hazard maps for Haiti. These maps are based on the current information we have on fault slip rates and historical and instrumental seismicity. These initial maps will be revised and improved as more data become available. In the short term, more extensive logic trees will be developed to better capture the uncertainty in key parameters. In the longer term, we will incorporate new information on fault parameters and previous large earthquakes obtained from geologic fieldwork. These seismic hazard maps are important for the management of the current crisis and the development of building codes and standards for the rebuilding effort. The boundary between the Caribbean and North American Plates in the Hispaniola region is a complex zone of deformation. The highly oblique ~20 mm/yr convergence between the two plates (DeMets and others, 2000) is partitioned between subduction zones off of the northern and southeastern coasts of Hispaniola and strike-slip faults that transect the northern and southern portions of the island. There are also thrust faults within the island that reflect the compressional component of motion caused by the geometry of the plate boundary. We follow the general methodology developed for the 1996 U.S. national seismic hazard maps and also as implemented in the 2002 and 2008 updates. This procedure consists of adding the seismic hazard calculated from crustal faults, subduction zones, and spatially smoothed seismicity for shallow earthquakes and Wadati-Benioff-zone earthquakes. Each one of these source classes will be described below. The lack of information on faults in Haiti requires many assumptions to be made. These assumptions will need to be revisited and reevaluated as more fieldwork and research are accomplished. We made two sets of maps using different assumptions about site conditions. One set of maps is for a firm-rock site condition (30-m averaged shear-wave velocity, Vs30, of 760 m/s). We also developed hazard maps that contain site amplification based on a grid of Vs30 values estimated from topographic slope. These maps take into account amplification from soils. We stress that these new maps are designed to quantify the hazard for Haiti; they do not consider all the sources of earthquake hazard that affect the Dominican Republic and therefore should not be considered as complete hazard maps for eastern Hispaniola. For example, we have not included hazard from earthquakes in the Mona Passage nor from large earthquakes on the subduction zone interface north of Puerto Rico. Furthermore, they do not capture all the earthquake hazards for eastern Cuba.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Flood of September 2008 in Northwestern Indiana

During September 12-15, 2008, rainfall ranging from 2 to more than 11 inches fell on northwestern Indiana. The rainfall resulted in extensive flooding on many streams within the Lake Michigan and Kankakee River Basins during September 12-18, causing two deaths, evacuation of hundreds of residents, and millions of dollars of damage to residences, businesses, and infrastructure. In all, six counties in northwestern Indiana were declared Federal disaster areas. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgages at four locations recorded new record peak streamflows as a result of the heavy rainfall. Peak-gage-height data, peak-streamflow data, annual exceedance probabilities, and recurrence intervals are tabulated in this report for 10 USGS streamgages in northwestern Indiana. Recurrence intervals of flood-peak streamflows were estimated to be greater than 100 years at six streamgages. Because flooding was particularly severe in the communities of Munster, Dyer, Hammond, Highland, Gary, Lake Station, Hobart, Schererville, Merrillville, Michiana Shores, and Portage, high-water-park data collected after the flood were tabulated for those communities. Flood peak inundation maps and water-surface profiles for selected streams were made in a geographic information system by combining high-water-mark data with the highest resolution digital elevation model data available.

Indiana↗
USGS2010

Historic Flooding in Georgia, 2009

Heavy rains in southern Georgia during March 27-April 3, 2009, and in northern Georgia during September 16-22, 2009, caused severe flooding and widespread damages to residential, public, and commercial structures. Of the 159 counties in Georgia, 69 were declared disaster areas because of flooding. The heavy rainfall in southern Georgia resulted in severe flooding in the Satilla-St. Marys and upper Ochlockonee Basins and caused approximately $60 million in damages to the public infrastructure. The heavy rainfall in northern Georgia resulted in severe flooding on many streams within the upper Chattahoochee, Altamaha, and Coosa-Tallapoosa Basins and caused 10 deaths, evacuation of thousands of residents, and approximately $500 million in damages. The U.S. Geological Survey computed annual exceedance probabilities of the peak flows in 2009 at 238 streamgages throughout the State. Record peak flows were recorded at 40 streamgages for the respective periods of record as a result of the heavy rainfall during the two multiday events. The peak flows at 33 streamgages exceeded the 1-percent annual exceedance probability (100-year recurrence interval), and 19 of these exceeded the 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability (500-year recurrence interval).

Georgia↗
USGS2010

Nogales flood detention study

Flooding in Ambos Nogales often exceeds the capacity of the channel and adjacent land areas, endangering many people. The Nogales Wash is being studied to prevent future flood disasters and detention features are being installed in tributaries of the wash. This paper describes the application of the KINEROS2 model and efforts to understand the capacity of these detention features under various flood and urbanization scenarios. Results depict a reduction in peak flow for the 10-year, 1-hour event based on current land use in tributaries with detention features. However, model results also demonstrate that larger storm events and increasing urbanization will put a strain on the features and limit their effectiveness.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Emergency management response to a warning-level Alaska-source tsunami impacting California: Chapter J in The SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) Tsunami Scenario

This chapter is directed towards two audiences: Firstly, it targets nonemergency management readers, providing them with insight on the process and challenges facing emergency managers in responding to tsunami Warning, particularly given this “short fuse” scenario. It is called “short fuse” because there is only a 5.5-hour window following the earthquake before arrival of the tsunami within which to evaluate the threat, disseminate alert and warning messages, and respond. This action initiates a period when crisis communication is of paramount importance. An additional dynamic that is important to note is that within 15 minutes of the earthquake, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS) will issue alert bulletins for the entire Pacific Coast. This is one-half the time actually presented by recent tsunamis from Japan, Chile, and Samoa. Second, the chapter provides emergency managers at all levels with insights into key considerations they may need to address in order to augment their existing plans and effectively respond to tsunami events. We look at emergency management response to the tsunami threat from three perspectives:“Top Down” (Threat analysis and Alert/Warning information from the Federal agency charged with Alert and Warning) “Bottom Up” (Emergency management’s Incident Command approach to responding to emergencies and disasters based on the needs of impacted local jurisdictions) “Across Time” (From the initiating earthquake event through emergency response) We focus on these questions: What are the government roles, relationships, and products that support Tsunami Alert and Warning dissemination? (Emergency Planning and Preparedness.) What roles, relationships, and products support emergency management response to Tsunami Warning and impact? (Engendering prudent public safety response.) What are the key emergency management activities, considerations, and challenges brought out by the SAFRR tsunami scenario? (Real emergencies) How do these activities, considerations, and challenges play out as the tsunami event unfolds across the “life” of the event? (Lessons)

California↗
USGS2015

National Earthquake Information Center systems overview and integration

Overview The primary mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) is comprehensive global earthquake monitoring (M4.5 or larger) and complete seismic monitoring of the United States for all significant earthquakes (M3.0 or larger or felt). In recent years, the NEIC has assumed a more prominent role in local and regional seismic monitoring, backup capabilities, and special studies. The NEIC uses numerous scientific algorithms to produce information products for local, national, and international disaster responders; infrastructure corporations (for example, utility providers and insurers); U.S. embassies worldwide; news agencies; national and international earth science research communities; and millions of public users. To support this mission, the NEIC operates a constant service to derive numerous information products as rapidly and accurately as possible. Derived information products and data sets provide a wealth of related earthquake information and include products such as location, magnitude, maps of shaking intensity, moment tensors, phase arrivals, and loss and damage reports. These information products are automatically derived in near real-time and refined over time. Earthquake information products vary from well formatted text files, to binary files, to directories full of many files. A team of analysts, who provide constant coverage, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, review the acquired data and automatically derived products (1) in near real-time for rapid release and (2) in the weeks following events to produce historical catalogs of global earthquakes in support of scientific research. Data and products are reviewed both in near real-time for rapid release and in the weeks following events to produce historical catalogs of global earthquakes in support of scientific research. At the present time, the NEIC publishes data for approximately 25,000 earthquakes annually. The NEIC software system that supports this service and mission comprises many subsystems. The internals of each subsystem are often complex, but the integration between all of the subsystems is well defined, standardized, and straightforward. This Open-File Report describes the systems’ integration infrastructure and how all the subsystems fit together. It provides summary views of the system as a whole, along with detailed views of the inputs, outputs, and dependencies for each subsystem. It also outlines the many shared data services that support these subsystems and applications as well as external customers. The NEIC systems-integration effort is ongoing. Additional integration steps, needed to reach our goals, are discussed. It is important to note that this document provides a brief introduction to the work of dozens of software developers and IT specialists, spanning in many cases more than a decade. References to significant amounts of supporting documentation, code, and information are supplied within.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Assessment of existing and potential landslide hazards resulting from the April 25, 2015 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake sequence

Introduction On April 25, 2015, a large ( M 7.8) earthquake shook much of central Nepal and was followed by a series of M >6 aftershocks, including a M 7.3 event on May 12, 2015. This earthquake and aftershocks, referred to as the “Gorkha earthquake sequence,” caused thousands of fatalities, damaged and destroyed entire villages, and displaced millions of residents. The earthquakes also triggered thousands of landslides in the exceedingly steep topography of Nepal; these landslides were responsible for hundreds of fatalities, and blocked vital roads and trails to affected villages (fig. 1). Landslides caused by the Gorkha earthquake sequence continue to pose both immediate and long-term hazards to villages and infrastructure within the affected region. Some landslides blocked rivers and thus created another potential concern for villages located downstream. With the support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), and in collaboration with earthquake-hazard organizations from both the United States (for example, U.S. National Science Foundation Geoengineering Extreme Event Reconnaissance [GEER] Team) and Nepal (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development [ICIMOD]), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) responded to this crisis by providing landslide-hazard expertise to Nepalese agencies and affected villages. In addition to collaborating with an international group of remote-sensing scientists to document the spatial distribution of landsliding in the first few weeks following the earthquake, the USGS conducted in-country landslide hazard assessments for 10 days beginning May 24, 2015. Much of the information obtained by the USGS during their time in Nepal was conveyed directly to affected villages and government agencies as opportunities arose. Upon return to the United States, data organization, interpretation, and synthesis began immediately to provide a rapid assessment of landslide hazards for use by Nepalese agencies during the 2015 summer monsoon (typically occurring from June through September). This report provides a detailed account of assessments performed in May and June 2015 and focuses on valley-blocking landslides because they have the potential to pose considerable hazard to many villages in Nepal. First, we provide a seismological background of Nepal and then detail the methods used for both external and in-country data collection and interpretation. Our results consist of an overview of landsliding extent, a characterization of all valley-blocking landslides identified during our work, and a description of video resources that provide high resolution coverage of approximately 1,000 kilometers (km) of river valleys and surrounding terrain affected by the Gorkha earthquake sequence. This is followed by a description of site-specific landslide-hazard assessments conducted while in Nepal and includes detailed descriptions of five noteworthy case studies. Finally, we assess the expectation for additional landslide hazards during the 2015 summer monsoon season.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Status report for the 3D Elevation Program, 2013-2014

The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) goal is to acquire, manage, and distribute enhanced three-dimensional elevation data for the Nation and U.S. territories by 2023. This status report covers implementation activities during 2013–2014 to include meeting funding objectives, developing a management structure, modernizing systems, and collecting and producing initial 3DEP data and products. The Nation will not have complete coverage of 3DEP quality data until 2023 assuming that sufficient funding is available. In spite of the overall condition of government budgets, the 3DEP initiative has gained widespread support and had incremental budget success to include supplemental funding resulting from natural disasters. The 3DEP Executive Forum and a wide range of professional organizations are actively working to maintain support for the program. The systems that have been developed to support increasing acquisition and processing levels are largely in place. The first 3DEP quality datasets were released to the public in late 2014. In addition, light detection and ranging (lidar), interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar), and digital elevation models (DEMs) acquired before 2014 are all supported within the new infrastructure and available for download. Research is ongoing to expand the suite of products and services, and to increase overall throughput and data management efficiency. Emerging technologies may result in lower acquisition costs in the future. Elevation data acquired by 3DEP partnerships will be available through The National Map representing one of the largest and most comprehensive databases publicly available for the United States.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

A software tool for rapid flood inundation mapping

The GIS Flood Tool (GFT) was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey with support from the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance to provide a means for production of reconnaissance-level flood inundation mapping for data-sparse and resource-limited areas of the world. The GFT has also attracted interest as a tool for rapid assessment flood inundation mapping for the Flood Inundation Mapping Program of the U.S. Geological Survey. The GFT can fill an important gap for communities that lack flood inundation mapping by providing a first-estimate of inundation zones, pending availability of resources to complete an engineering study. The tool can also help identify priority areas for application of scarce flood inundation mapping resources. The technical basis of the GFT is an application of the Manning equation for steady flow in an open channel, operating on specially processed digital elevation data. The GFT is implemented as a software extension in ArcGIS. Output maps from the GFT were validated at 11 sites with inundation maps produced previously by the Flood Inundation Mapping Program using standard one-dimensional hydraulic modeling techniques. In 80 percent of the cases, the GFT inundation patterns matched 75 percent or more of the one-dimensional hydraulic model inundation patterns. Lower rates of pattern agreement were seen at sites with low relief and subtle surface water divides. Although the GFT is simple to use, it should be applied with the oversight or review of a qualified hydraulic engineer who understands the simplifying assumptions of the approach.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

Examination of flood characteristics at selected streamgages in the Meramec River Basin, eastern Missouri, December 2015–January 2016

Overview Heavy rainfall resulted in major flooding in the Meramec River Basin in eastern Missouri during late December 2015 through early January 2016. Cumulative rainfall from December 14 to 29, 2015, ranged from 7.6 to 12.3 inches at selected precipitation stations in the basin with flooding driven by the heaviest precipitation (3.9–9.7 inches) between December 27 and 29, 2015. Financial losses from flooding included damage to homes and other structures, damage to roads, and debris removal. Eight of 11 counties in the basin were declared a Federal Disaster Area. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and St. Louis Metropolitan Sewer District, operates multiple streamgages along the Meramec River and its primary tributaries including the Bourbeuse River and Big River. The period of record for streamflow at streamgages in the basin included in this report ranges from 24 to 102 years. Instrumentation in a streamgage shelter automatically makes observations of stage using a variety of methods (submersible pressure transducer, non-submersible pressure transducer, or non-contact radar). These observations are recorded autonomously at a predetermined programmed frequency (typically either 15 or 30 minutes) dependent on drainage-area size and concomitant flashiness of the stream. Although stage data are important, streamflow data are equally or more important for streamflow forecasting, water-quality constituent loads computation, flood-frequency analysis, and flood mitigation planning. Streamflows are computed from recorded stage data using an empirically determined relation between stage and streamflow termed a “rating.” Development and verification of the rating requires periodic onsite discrete measurements of streamflow throughout time and over the range of stages to define local hydraulic conditions. The purpose of this report is to examine characteristics of flooding that occurred in the Meramec River Basin in December 2015–January 2016 including peak stages, peak streamflows, and the flood-frequency statistics associated with the peak flows. A comparison between the December 2015–January 2016 flood and a similar flood in December 1982 in the Meramec River Basin also is included.

Missouri↗
USGS2017

Peak streamflow on selected streams in Arkansas, December 2015

Heavy rainfall during December 2015 resulted in flooding across parts of Arkansas; rainfall amounts were as high as 12 inches over a period from December 27, 2015, to December 29, 2015. Although precipitation accumulations were highest in northwestern Arkansas, significant flooding occurred in other parts of the State. Flood damage occurred in several counties as water levels rose in streams, and disaster declarations were declared in 32 of the 75 counties in Arkansas. Given the severity of the December 2015 flooding, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), conducted a study to document the meteorological and hydrological conditions prior to and during the flood; compiled flood-peak gage heights, streamflows, and flood probabilities at USGS streamflow-gaging stations; and estimated streamflows and flood probabilities at selected ungaged locations.

Arkansas↗
USGS2020

Envisioning a multi-agency and multi-academic institution geomorphology data exchange portal

Access to bathymetry and geomorphology data for rivers and reservoirs is a critical need in multiple agencies and academia. These data are needed to make water-resource-management decisions regarding river restoration, resource protection, infrastructure design and sustainability, and flood-risk reduction, and during natural disasters. Sharing of data increases decision-making capacity by incorporating information from entire watersheds, provides knowledge from similar settings being managed or studied by other entities, and helps meet the goals of the Federal Open Water Data Initiative. Addressing these needs across broad spatial and temporal scales would be made more efficient if these data were available in consistent formats with standardized metadata and were either stored in a centralized database or integrated with existing geospatial datasets. Because of renewed interest and technological advances, representatives from multiple Federal agencies and academic institutions have created a new working group to scope the development of a Geomorphology Data Exchange Portal to increase access to needed data. The working group has developed a vision for the Portal and outlined possible approaches to achieve the vision. Short-term approaches may include leveraging existing data-access portals and data-processing tools and integrating geomorphology data with existing national geospatial datasets.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2020

2020 drought in New England

Below average and infrequent rainfall from May through September 2020 led to an extreme hydrologic drought across much of New England, with some areas experiencing a flash drought, reflecting its quick onset. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) recorded record-low streamflow and groundwater levels throughout the region. In September, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (2020) declared Aroostook County in Maine and Hillsborough and Merrimack Counties in New Hampshire as crop disaster areas. By the beginning of October, 166 community water systems and 5 municipalities in New Hampshire, more than 100 municipalities in Massachusetts, and several community water supplies in Connecticut, Maine, and Rhode Island had mandatory water restrictions in place.

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, ↗