Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Water-Resources Bulletin”

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.

52 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS1987

Water-resources report prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey, Texas District, 1973-1986

Since 1973, personnel of the Texas District, Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey have written and published approximately 300 reports concerning the water resources of Texas. These reports vary considerably in subject matter, complexity, format, desired audience, and publication outlet. Some of the reports have been published in different outlets of U.S. Geological Survey formal report series Professional Paper, Water-Supply Paper, and Hydrologic Investigations Atlas and informal report series Water-Resources Investigations, Open-File, and Water-Data Reports. Some have been published by cooperating agencies (hereinafter called "Cooperator-Published Reports") in their prescribed report series; occasionally, some reports are published both in a U.S. Geological Survey series and a cooperating agency series. This compilation lists reports prepared and published by the Texas District during 1973 through 1986 and is a continuation of a previous report, WRIR 20-75, which listed reports released and published during 1887-1974 (Friebele, 1975). Also included in this compilation are some reports published in 1973 and 1974 and a complete listing of Edwards Underground Water District bulletins and reports which were omitted from WRIR 20-75.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Flow-frequency characteristics of Vermont streams

The safe and economical design of infrastructure in and near waterways and the effective management of flood-hazard areas require information on streamflow that may not be readily available. This report provides estimates of flow-frequency characteristics for gaged streams in Vermont and describes methods for estimating flow-frequency characteristics for ungaged streams. The flow-frequency characteristics investigated are the magnitude of peak discharges at recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, and 500 years, and the magnitude of daily-mean discharges exceeded 25, 50, and 75 percent of the time. Peak-flow frequency characteristics for gaged streams were computed following the guidelines in Bulletin 17B of the U.S. Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data. To determine the peak-flow exceedance probabilities at stream-gaging stations in Vermont, a new generalized skew coefficient map for the State was developed. This new map has greater resolution and more current data than the existing National map. The standard error of the new map is 0.269. Two methods of extending streamflow record were applied to improve estimates of peak-flow frequency for streams with short flow records (10 to 15 years) in small drainage areas (sites less than 15 square miles). In the first method, a two-station comparison, data from a long-record site was used to adjust the frequency characteristics at the short-record site. This method was applied to 31 crest-stage gages--stations at which only instantaneous peak discharges are determined--in Vermont. The second method used rainfall-runoff modeling. Precipitation and evapotranspiration data from 1948 to 1999 for numerous climate data-collection sites were used as input to a model to simulate flows at 10 stream-gaging stations in Vermont. Also, methods are described to estimate flow-frequency characteristics for ungaged and unregulated rural streams in Vermont. The peak-flow estimating methods were developed by generalized-least-squares regression procedures with data from 138 U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging stations in Vermont and in adjacent areas of New York, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Quebec. The flow-duration (daily flow exceeded a given percentage of the time) estimating methods were developed by ordinary-least-squares regression procedures with data from 81 stream-gaging stations in Vermont and adjacent states.

Vermont↗
USGS2003

Estimating the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Idaho

Accurate estimates of peak flows in the Big Lost River at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) are needed to assist planners and managers with evaluating possible effects of flooding on facilities at the INEEL. A large difference of 4,350 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) between two previous estimates of the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River near the western boundary of the INEEL prompted the present study. Regression models that compared annual peak flows and attenuation of annual peak flows between successive gaging stations for the same flow event were used to estimate the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River. The 100-year peak flow of 4,790 ft 3 /s at the Howell Ranch gaging station was used as the starting point for this analysis. This estimate was determined by using a three-parameter log-Pearson Type III distribution as outlined in “Guidelines for Determining Flood Flow Frequency” (Bulletin 17B by the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data). The regression models indicated that, in the reach of the Big Lost River between Howell Ranch and Mackay Reservoir, downstream peak flows are lower than upstream peak flows. Peak-flow attenuation values for this reach of the river decreased nonlinearly as the magnitude of the peak flow increased. Extrapolation of the trend resulted in an attenuation estimate of 13 percent for this reach relative to the 100-year peak flow at the Howell Ranch gaging station. In the lower reach of the Big Lost River between Mackay Reservoir and Arco, downstream peak flows are also lower than upstream peak flows. However, in contrast to the upper reach, peak-flow attenuation values decreased linearly as the magnitude of the peak flow increased. Extrapolation of the data indicated that peak-flow attenuations in this reach of the river approach zero for flows approaching the 100-year peak-flow estimate immediately upstream and downstream from Mackay Reservoir. A regression model of annual maximum daily mean flows between Arco and the INEEL diversion dam indicated that the attenuation values in this reach of the river are nearly the same for all flows of record. Extrapolation of the linear regression of these values resulted in an attenuation estimate of 10 percent. Seepage measurements made during 1951–53 also resulted in a loss estimate of approximately 10 percent. This attenuation value, combined with the values from analyses of the upstream reaches, resulted in an estimate of the 100-year peak flow for the Big Lost River immediately upstream from the INEEL diversion dam of 3,750 ft 3 /s; upper and lower 95-percent confidence limits were 6,250 ft 3 /s and 1,300 ft 3 /s, respectively. Localized rainfall, even of high intensity, is not likely to produce large peak flows at the INEEL because of high loss rates (infiltration, bank storage, and channel storage) along much of the stream channel. The relatively short flow durations resulting from rainstorms historically have not provided sufficient volumes of water to satisfy local storage demands (bank and channel storage). Only after these storage demands are met do the loss rates decrease enough for significant peak flows to reach the INEEL site. An uncertain component of the present analysis is the effect of seismic activity on the 100-year peak-flow estimate. Analysis of the effect of the magnitude 7.3 Borah Peak earthquake in 1983 on normal flow conditions in the Big Lost River suggests that the joint occurrence of a large earthquake and a 100-year peak flow could significantly increase the magnitude of the peak flow at the INEEL.

Idaho↗
USGS2003

Estimating the magnitude of peak flows for streams in Kentucky for selected recurrence intervals

This report gives estimates of, and presents techniques for estimating, the magnitude of peak flows for streams in Kentucky for recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 years. A flowchart in this report guides the user to the appropriate estimates and (or) estimating techniques for a site on a specific stream. Estimates of peak flows are given for 222 U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in Kentucky. In the development of the peak-flow estimates at gaging stations, a new generalized skew coefficient was calculated for the State. This single statewide value of 0.011 (with a standard error of prediction of 0.520) is more appropriate for Kentucky than the national skew isoline map in Bulletin 17B of the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data. Regression equations are presented for estimating the peak flows on ungaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins. The equations were developed by use of generalized-least-squares regression procedures at 187 U.S. Geological Survey gaging stations in Kentucky and 51 stations in surrounding States. Kentucky was divided into seven flood regions. Total drainage area is used in the final regression equations as the sole explanatory variable, except in Regions 1 and 4 where main-channel slope also was used. The smallest average standard errors of prediction were in Region 3 (from -13.1 to +15.0 percent) and the largest average standard errors of prediction were in Region 5 (from -37.6 to +60.3 percent). One section of this report describes techniques for estimating peak flows for ungaged sites on gaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins. Another section references two previous U.S. Geological Survey reports for peak-flow estimates on ungaged, unregulated, urban streams. Estimating peak flows at ungaged sites on regulated streams is beyond the scope of this report, because peak flows on regulated streams are dependent upon variable human activities.

Kentucky↗
USGS1987

Floods in Kansas and techniques for estimating their magnitude and frequency on unregulated streams

Techniques are presented for generalizing the skewness coefficient of log-Pearson Type III distributions of annual maximum discharges and for flood magnitudes that have selected recurrence intervals from 2 to 100 yr. A weighted least-square (WLS) regression model was used to generalize the coefficients of station skewness that resulted in a root-mean-sq error of prediction of 0.35 compared to 0.55 for the skewness map published in Bulletin 17B of the U.S. Water Resources Council. Estimates of generalized skewness were computed for each of 245 streamflow gaging stations with a minimum of 10 years of record and a contributing drainage area of < 20,000 sq mi. The WLS regression model also was used to develop equations for estimating flood magnitude for selected recurrence intervals for ungaged stream locations by using data from 218 of the 245 streamflow gaging stations that had contributing-drainage areas of less than 10,000 sq mi. The errors of prediction of the most reliable WLS equations ranged from 28 to 42%. The WLS equations were compared statistically to previous developed equations and were determined to be different and more accurate than previously published equations. Flood magnitudes and frequencies for 245 streamflow gaging stations, based on data collected through the 1983 water year, are presented along with a summary of the seasonal distribution of annual maximum discharges and an analysis of the maximum observed discharges. (Author 's abstract)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1999

Estimating the magnitude of peak flows for streams in Maine for selected recurrence intervals

This report gives estimates of, and presents techniques for estimating, the magnitude of peak flows for streams in Maine for recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, and 500 years. A flowchart in this report guides the user to the appropriate estimates and (or) estimating techniques for a site on a specific stream. Section 1, 'Estimates of peak flows and maximum recorded flows at USGS streamflow-gaging stations,' contains peak-flow estimates and the maximum recorded flows at 98 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamflow-gaging stations. In the development of the peak-flow estimates at gaging stations, a new generalized skew coefficient was calculated for Maine. This single statewide value of 0.029 (with a standard error of prediction of 0.297) is more accurate for Maine than the national skew isoline map in Bulletin 17B of the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data. Two techniques are presented to estimate the peak flows for ungaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins. These two techniques were developed using generalized least squares regression procedures at 70 USGS gaging stations in Maine and eastern New Hampshire. Section 2, 'Estimating peak flows for ungaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins,' uses the final explanatory variables of drainage area and basin wetlands. The average standard error of prediction for the 100-year peak flow regression equation in section 2 was 48.6 percent to -32.7 percent. Drainage area was the only explanatory variable used in section 3, 'Estimating peak flows for ungaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins - Simplified technique.' The average standard error of prediction for the 100-year peak flow regression equation in section 3 was 80.3 percent to -44.5 percent. Section 4 of the report describes techniques for estimating peak flows for ungaged sites on gaged, unregulated streams in rural drainage basins. Section 5, 'Estimating peak flows for ungaged, unregulated streams in urbanized drainage basins,' describes regression equations for use when a drainage basin is urbanized. These urban regression equations come from a previous USGS nationwide study. As stated in section 6, because peak flows on regulated streams are dependent on variable human actions, estimating peak flows at ungaged sites on regulated streams is beyond the scope of this report.

Maine↗
USGS1973

Hydrogeologic data for the Quinnipiac River basin, Connecticut

This report contains geologic, ground-water, and quality-of-water data collected for the ground-water part of a water-resources inventory of the Quinnipiac River basin, Connecticut. The study was made by the U.S. Geological Survey in fiscal cooperation with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Collection sites for data used in the study are shown in plate A. A companion report interprets the ground-water, quality-of-water, and surfacewater data collected for the study (Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 27, in parparation). The Quinnipiac River basin~ as used in this report~ is a 360-square-mile area in south-central Connecticut drained principally by the Quinnipiac River and its tributaries and several smaller streams~ which drain directly to Long Island Sound. (See front cover and plate A.) The study area includes all or parts of the following towns: Ansonia, Berlin, Bethany, Branford, Bristol, Cheshire, Derby, Durham, East Haven, Farmington, Guilford, Hamden, Meriden, Middlefield, Middletown, Milford, New Britain, New Haven, North Branford, North Haven, Orange, Plainville, Prospect, Southington, Wallingford, West Haven, Wolcott, and Woodbridge. Data collected for this investigation from July 1969 to December 1971 were supplemented by data collected during previous investigations. This report includes some records of wells and test holes published in Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 5 and also includes some records used but not published in Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 14. Table 5 contains old but previously unpublished analyses of water from wells in New Haven collected primarily from 1938 to 1949. Ownership of the sampled wells, as shown in table 1 and table 5, was determined at the time of the original inventory, and this information may now be outdated. Many of these wells have been destroyed since they were last sampled and others, though still in existence, are no longer in use.

Connecticut↗
USGS1975

Hydrogeologic data for the lower Connecticut River basin, Connecticut

This report contains geologic, ground-water, and miscellaneous data on the quality of surface water collected for a water-resources inventory of the lower Connecticut River basin, Connecticut. The study was made by the U.S. Geological Survey in fiscal cooperation with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. A companion report (Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 31, in preparation) interprets the factual information presented here or otherwise collected for the study.

Connecticut↗
USGS1980

Hydrogeologic data for the lower Connecticut River basin, Connecticut

This report contains geologic, ground-water, and miscellaneous data on the quality of surface water collected for a water-resources inventory of the lower Connecticut River basin, Connecticut. The study was made by the U.S. Geological Survey in fiscal cooperation with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. A companion report (Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 31, in preparation) interprets the factual information presented here or otherwise collected for the study.

Connecticut↗
USGS1982

Hydrology of the surficial aquifer in the Floyd River Basin, Iowa

The Floyd River basin was studied to provide water-resources Information for a typical surficial aquifer in northwest Iowa. Data collection included test drilling, water-level measurements, and chemical analyses of surface and ground water. The Floyd River basin drains 961 square miles of highly dissected to gently rolling topography. Major streams generally are flanked by flood plains underlain by uncemented sand and-gravel deposits. Most of the basin is directly underlain by glacial drift of Pleistocene age which is In turn underlain by rocks of Cretaceous age. Sand-and-gravel deposits underlying the major flood plains and in buried bedrock channels within the drift comprise the surficial aquifer. The surficial aquifer ranges from 10 to 40 feet In thickness and averages about 20 feet thick. Both unconfined and confined conditions occur in the aquifer and water levels range from 2 to 55 feet below land surface. An aquifer test conducted in the surficial aquifer where it is about 25 feet thick and is confined by an overlying low permeability bed Indicated an average hydraulic conductivity of 383 feet per day and a storage coefficient of 0.0001. The well was pumped at 650 gallons per minute for 43 hours. An observation well about 70 feet from the pumping well had a maximum drawdown of about 10 feet.

Iowa↗
USGS1987

Bibliography of U.S. Geological Survey water-resources reports for Utah

This bibliography contains a complete listing to December 31, 1986, of reports relating to the water resources of Utah prepared by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey. Discussions of the related subjects of geology, hydrology, and chemical quality of the water are included in many of the reports. The reports were, for the most part, prepared by personnel assigned to the Water Resources Division, Utah District, in cooperation with State, other Federal, and local agencies. A few reports were prepared under contract with the Geological Survey or in cooperation with the geological Survey. A few were compiled under direct funds to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Utah↗
USGS1980

Bibliography of U.S. Geological Survey water-resources reports for Utah

This bibliography contains a complete listing to June 30, 1980, of reports relating to the water resources of Utah prepared by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey. Discussions of the related subjects of geology, hydrology, and chemical quality of the water are included in many of the reports. The reports were, for the most part, prepared by personnel assigned to the Water Resources Division, Utah District, in cooperation with State and local agencies.

Utah↗
USGS1966

Bibliography of U.S. Geological Survey water-resources reports for Utah

This bibliography contains a complete listing to December 1966 of reports relating to the water resources of Utah prepared by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey. Discussions of the related subjects of geology, hydrology, and chemical quality of the water are included in many of the reports. The reports were, for the most part, prepared by personnel assigned to the Water Resources Division, Utah District, in cooperation with State and local agencies.

Utah↗
USGS1975

Bibliography of U.S. Geological Survey water-resources reports for Utah

This bibliography contains a complete listing to December 31, 1974, of reports relating to the water resources of Utah prepared by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey. Discussions of the related subjects of geology, hydrology, and chemical quality of the water are included in many of the reports. The reports were, for the most part, prepared by personnel assigned to the Water Resources Division, Utah District, in cooperation with State and local agencies.

Utah↗
USGS1972

Bibliography of U.S. Geological Survey water-resources reports for Utah

This bibliography contains a complete listing to December 31, 1971, of reports relating to the water resources of Utah prepared by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey. Discussions of the related subjects of geology, hydrology, and chemical quality of the water are included in many of the reports. The reports were, for the most part, prepared by personnel assigned to the Water Resources Division, Utah District, in cooperation with State and local agencies.

Utah↗
USGS2016

NHDPlus as a geospatial framework for SPARROW modeling

Successful water-resource management requires thorough knowledge and understanding of the relations among water-quality contaminate sources and the factors that affect the transport throughout a hydrologic system. Surface-water modeling is a valuable tool that can be applied to help advance and achieve the understanding of these dynamic relations. Spatially Referenced Regressions on Watershed Attributes (SPARROW) is one such model that uses nonlinear statistical methods to define conceptual and spatial relations among quantities of contaminant sources, monitored contaminant load, aquatic transport processes. NHDPlus Version 2 (V2) is a digital representation of a hydrologic network of streams and associated catchments. The dataset provides the fundamental spatial framework for SPARROW modeling.

Impact Assessment Bulletin↗