Geology topics

Jonathan W. Musser

Publications and source records attributed to Jonathan W. Musser.

16 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Effects of impoundments on selected flood-frequency and daily mean streamflow characteristics in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long history of working cooperatively with the South Carolina Department of Transportation to develop methods for estimating the magnitude and frequency of floods for rural and urban streams that have minimal to no regulation or tidal influence. As part of those previous investigations, flood-frequency estimates also have been generated for selected streamgages on regulated streams. This report assesses the effects of impoundments on flood-frequency characteristics by comparing annual exceedance probability (AEP) streamflows from pre- and post-regulated (before and after impoundment) periods at 18 long-term USGS streamgages, which is defined as a streamgage with 30 or more years of record, in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. For an assessment of how differences in such statistics can be influenced by period of record and hydrologic conditions captured in those records, which could be considered as natural variability, AEP streamflows at an additional 18 long-term USGS streamgages that represent unregulated conditions in those three States were computed and compared for the first and last half of those records. Of the 18 long-term streamgages with pre- and post-regulated periods of record, 17 streamgages had both peak streamflows and daily mean streamflows available. To further assess how impoundments may influence a broader range of streamflow characteristics, The Nature Conservancy’s Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration software was used to compare selected streamflow characteristics generated from daily mean streamflows for pre- and post-regulated periods of record at 16 of those long-term streamgages. For comparison of the natural variability of such streamflow statistics, two periods of record (first half and last half) also were compared at 17 of the 18 long-term streamgages on unregulated streams. The remaining long-term streamgage on an unregulated stream included in this report had only annual peak streamflows and, therefore, was not included in the hydrologic alteration analysis. In a separate USGS investigation completed in 2023, flood-frequency statistics for the 50-, 20-, 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, 0.5-, and 0.2-percent AEP streamflows (also known as the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, 200-, and 500-year recurrence interval streamflows, respectively) were computed for 72 streamgages on regulated streams in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Of those 72 streamgages, 29 streamgages were found to be redundant, which is a situation where the drainage basin of one streamgage is contained inside another (nested) and the two basins are of similar size. For the remaining 43 streamgages, 39 had basins where 75 percent or more of the drainage area was above the Fall Line. Those 39 streamgages were included in this investigation to develop regional regression equations that can be used to estimate the flood-frequency statistics at ungaged locations on regulated streams in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina in which 75 percent or more of the drainage basin is located above the Fall Line. The flood-frequency regression equations are functions of drainage area and maximum storage index computed for upstream reservoirs.

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2023

Magnitude and frequency of floods for rural streams in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, 2017—Summary

Reliable flood-frequency estimates are important for hydraulic structure design and floodplain management in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Annual peak streamflows (hereafter, referred to as peak flows) measured at 965 U.S. Geological Survey streamgages were used to compute flood-frequency estimates with annual exceedance probabilities (AEPs) of 50, 20, 10, 4, 2, 1, 0.5, and 0.2 percent. These AEPs correspond to flood-recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 years, respectively. A subset of these streamgages (801) were used to develop equations to predict the AEP flood flows at ungaged stream locations. This study was completed by the USGS in cooperation with the Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina Departments of Transportation and the North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, and the results are summarized in this fact sheet. The complete results and the supporting data are presented in the companion scientific investigations report and data release.

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2023

Magnitude and frequency of floods for rural streams in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, 2017—Results

Reliable estimates of the magnitude and frequency of floods are an important part of the framework for hydraulic-structure design and flood-plain management in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Annual peak flows measured at U.S. Geological Survey streamgages are used to compute flood‑frequency estimates at those streamgages. However, flood‑frequency estimates also are needed at ungaged stream locations. A process known as regionalization was used to develop regression equations to estimate the magnitude and frequency of floods at ungaged locations. A multistate approach was used to update estimates of the magnitude and frequency of floods in rural, ungaged basins in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Annual peak-flow data through September 2017 were analyzed for 965 streamgages with 10 or more years of data on rural streams in Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and adjacent parts of Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, and Virginia. Flood‑frequency estimates of the 50‑, 20‑, 10‑, 4‑, 2‑, 1‑, 0.5‑, and 0.2‑percent annual exceedance probability streamflows, which correspond to flood-recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 years, respectively, were computed for the 965 streamgages following national guidelines. As part of the computation of flood‑frequency estimates for the streamgages, an updated value for the regional skew coefficient (0.048) was developed using a Bayesian generalized least squares regression model. The new regional skew has a mean square error or average variance of prediction of 0.092. Additionally, basin characteristics for these stations were computed using a geographical information system. Exploratory analyses on the 965 streamgages confirmed the five hydrologic regions for Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina defined in a previous rural flood‑frequency study. From the 965 streamgages, streamgages with 30 or more years of record were used to complete a peak-flow trend analysis. Of the 965 streamgages, 164 streamgages were found to be redundant and were excluded from the regional regression analyses. Data from the remaining 801 streamgages (292 in Georgia, 75 in South Carolina, 303 in North Carolina, 15 in Alabama, 12 in Florida, 39 in Tennessee, and 65 in Virginia) were used in a regional regression analysis relating basin characteristics to flood‑frequency estimates. This analysis, based on generalized least squares regression, was used to develop a set of predictive equations to estimate the 50‑, 20‑, 10‑, 4‑, 2‑, 1‑, 0.5‑, and 0.2‑percent annual exceedance probability streamflows for rural, ungaged basins in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The final set of predictive equations are all functions of drainage area and percentage of the drainage basin within each of the five hydrologic regions. Average errors of prediction for these regression equations range from 35.8 to 44.4 percent. Flood‑frequency estimates also were computed for 72 regulated (for example, a streamgage where flow is altered by a dam or weir) streamgages in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina with 20 or more years of post-regulation record using data through water year 2019. The water year is the annual period from October 1 through September 30 and is designated by the year in which the period ends. Of the 72 regulated streamgages, 18 had pre-regulated periods of record that also were analyzed as part of this study. Flow adjustments were applied to historic peaks and large floods from the pre-regulated period, if available, for use in the post-regulation frequency analysis. Estimates of large floods provide valuable information in frequency analysis and, thus, were included in the post-regulation frequency analysis.

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2019

Flood-inundation maps for the Yellow River from River Drive to Centerville Highway, Gwinnett County, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 16.4-mile reach of the Yellow River in Gwinnett County, Georgia, from 0.5 mile upstream from River Drive to Centerville Highway (Georgia State Route 124) were developed to depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at two U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgages in the mapped area. The maps for the 9.0-mile reach from 0.5 mile upstream from River Drive to Stone Mountain Highway (U.S. Route 78) are referenced to the streamgage Yellow River near Snellville, Ga. (station 02206500), and the maps for the 7.4-mile reach from Stone Mountain Highway to Centerville Highway are referenced to the streamgage Yellow River at Ga. 124, near Lithonia, Ga. (02207120). Real-time stage information from these streamgages can be used with these maps to estimate near real-time areas of inundation. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgages Yellow River near Snellville, Ga. (02206500), and Yellow River at Ga. 124, near Lithonia, Ga. (02207120), can be used in conjunction with the maps developed for 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 Center's River Analysis System (HEC–RAS) software for the Yellow River and was used to compute flood profiles for a 16.4-mile reach of the Yellow River. The hydraulic model was then used to simulate 16 water-surface profiles at 1.0-foot (ft) intervals at the Yellow River near Snellville streamgage and 17 water-surface profiles at 1.0-ft intervals at the Yellow River near Lithonia streamgage. At the Yellow River near Snellville streamgage, the profiles ranged from a stage of 18.0 ft, which is 819.1 ft above the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88), to a stage of 33.0 ft, which is 834.1 ft above NAVD 88. At the Yellow River near Lithonia streamgage, the profiles ranged from the National Weather Service action stage of 13.0 ft, which is 732.5 ft above NAVD 88, to a stage of 29.0 ft, which is 748.5 ft above NAVD 88. 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-ft horizontal resolution—to delineate the area flooded at each 1.0-ft interval of stream stage for both streamgages.

Georgia↗

USGS2018

Flood-inundation maps for the Withlacoochee River From Skipper Bridge Road to St. Augustine Road, within the City of Valdosta, Georgia, and Lowndes County, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 12.6-mile reach of the Withlacoochee River from Skipper Bridge Road to St. Augustine Road (Georgia State Route 133) were developed to depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgage at Withlacoochee River at Skipper Bridge Road, near Bemiss, Ga. (023177483). Real-time stage information from this streamgage can be used with these maps to estimate near real-time areas of inundation. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgage at Withlacoochee River at Skipper Bridge Road, near Bemiss, Ga. (023177483), can be used in conjunction with the maps developed for 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 Engineer-ing Center’s River Analysis System (HEC–RAS) software for the Withlacoochee River and was used to compute flood profiles for a 12.6-mile reach of the Withlacoochee River. The hydraulic model was then used to simulate 23 water-surface profiles at 1.0-foot (ft) intervals at the Withlacoochee River near the Bemiss streamgage. The profiles ranged from the National Weather Service action stage of 10.7 ft, which is 131.0 ft above the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88), to a stage of 32.7 ft, which is 153.0 ft above NAVD 88. 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 4.0-ft horizontal resolution—to delineate the area flooded at each 1.0-ft interval of stream stage.

Georgia↗

USGS2017

Characterization of peak streamflows and flood inundation at selected areas in North Carolina following Hurricane Matthew, October 2016

The passage of Hurricane Matthew through central and eastern North Carolina during October 7–9, 2016, brought heavy rainfall, which resulted in major flooding. More than 15 inches of rain was recorded in some areas. More than 600 roads were closed, including Interstates 95 and 40, and nearly 99,000 structures were affected by floodwaters. Immediately following the flooding, the U.S. Geological Survey documented 267 high-water marks, of which 254 were surveyed. North Carolina Emergency Management documented and surveyed 353 high-water marks. Using a subset of these highwater marks, six flood-inundation maps were created for hard-hit communities. Digital datasets of the inundation areas, study reach boundary, and water-depth rasters are available for download. In addition, peak gage-height data, peak streamflow data, and annual exceedance probabilities (in percent) were determined for 24 U.S. Geological Survey streamgages located near the heavily flooded communities.

North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2017

Effects of impervious area and BMP implementation and design on storm runoff and water quality in eight small watersheds

The effects of increases in effective impervious area (EIA) and the implementation of water quality protection designed detention pond best management practices (BMPs) on storm runoff and stormwater quality were assessed in Gwinnett County, Georgia, for the period 2001-2008. Trends among eight small watersheds were compared, using a time trend study design. Significant trends were detected in three storm hydrologic metrics and in five water quality constituents that were adjusted for variability in storm characteristics and climate. Trends in EIA ranged from 0.10 to 1.35, and changes in EIA treated by BMPs ranged from 0.19 to 1.32; both expressed in units of percentage of drainage area per year. Trend relations indicated that for every 1% increase in watershed EIA, about 2.6, 1.1, and 1.5% increases in EIA treated by BMPs would be required to counteract the effects of EIA added to the watersheds on peak streamflow, stormwater yield, and storm streamflow runoff, respectively. Relations between trends in EIA, BMP implementation, and water quality were counterintuitive. This may be the result of (1) changes in constituent inputs in the watersheds, especially downstream of areas treated by BMPs; (2) BMPs may have increased the duration of stormflow that results in downstream channel erosion; and/or (3) spurious relationships between increases in EIA, BMP implementation, and constituent inputs with development rates.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗

USGS2016

Flood-Inundation Maps of Selected Areas Affected by the Flood of October 2015 in Central and Coastal South Carolina

Heavy rainfall occurred across South Carolina during October 1–5, 2015, as a result of an upper atmospheric low-pressure system that funneled tropical moisture from Hurricane Joaquin into the State. The storm caused major flooding in the central and coastal parts of South Carolina. Almost 27 inches of rain fell near Mount Pleasant in Charleston County during this period. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgages recorded peaks of record at 17 locations, and 15 other locations had peaks that ranked in the top 5 for the period of record. During the October 2015 flood event, USGS personnel made about 140 streamflow measurements at 86 locations to verify, update, or extend existing rating curves (which are used to compute streamflow from monitored river stage). Immediately after the storm event, USGS personnel documented 602 high-water marks, noting the location and height of the water above land surface. Later in October, 50 additional high-water marks were documented near bridges for South Carolina Department of Transportation. Using a subset of these high-water marks, 20 flood-inundation maps of 12 communities were created. Digital datasets of the inundation area, modeling boundary, and water depth rasters are all available for download.

South Carolina↗

USGS2015

Flood-inundation maps for South Fork Peachtree Creek from the Brockett Road bridge to the Willivee Drive bridge, DeKalb County, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 5.3-mile reach of South Fork Peachtree Creek that extends from about 500 feet above the Brockett Road bridge to the Willivee Drive bridge were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with DeKalb County, Georgia. 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 at South Fork Peachtree at Casa Drive, near Clarkston, Georgia (02336152). Real-time stage information from 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/ ). A one-dimensional step-backwater model was developed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC–RAS software for South Fork Peachtree Creek and was used to compute flood profiles for a 5.3-mile reach of South Fork Peachtree Creek. The model was calibrated using the most current (2015) stage-discharge relation at the USGS streamgage South Fork Peachtree at Casa Drive, near Clarkston, Georgia (02336152). The hydraulic model was then used to simulate 13 water-surface profiles at 0.5-foot intervals at the South Fork Peachtree Creek near Clarkston streamgage. The profiles ranged from just above bankfull stage (6.0 feet) to approximately 3.21 feet above the highest recorded water level (12.0 feet). The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model—derived from light detection and ranging data having a 5.0-foot horizontal resolution—to delineate the area flooded at each 0.5-foot interval of stream stage. The availability of these flood-inundation maps, when combined with real-time stage information from USGS streamgages, provides emergency management personnel and residents with critical information during flood-response activities, such as evacuations and road closures, in addition to post-flood recovery efforts.

Georgia↗

USGS2015

Flood-inundation maps for Big Creek from the McGinnis Ferry Road bridge to the confluence of Hog Wallow Creek, Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 12.4-mile reach of Big Creek that extends from 260 feet above the McGinnis Ferry Road bridge to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgage at Big Creek below Hog Wallow Creek at Roswell, Georgia (02335757), were developed by the USGS in cooperation with the cities of Alpharetta and Roswell, 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 Big Creek near Alpharetta, Georgia (02335700). Real-time stage information from 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 for many streams where the USGS operates streamgages and provides flow data. The forecasted peak-stage information for the USGS streamgage at Big Creek near Alpharetta (02335700), available through the AHPS Web site, may be used in conjunction with the maps developed for 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 Big Creek and was used to compute flood profiles for a 12.4-mile reach of Big Creek. The model was calibrated using the most current (2015) stage-discharge relations at two USGS streamgages on Big Creek: Big Creek near Alpharetta (02335700) and Big Creek below Hog Wallow Creek at Roswell (02335757). The hydraulic model was then used to simulate 19 water-surface profiles at 0.5-foot intervals at the Big Creek near Alpharetta streamgage. The profiles ranged from just above bankfull stage (6.0 feet) to approximately 1.95 feet above the highest recorded water level at the Alpharetta streamgage site (15.0 feet). The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model—derived from light detection and ranging data having a 3.0-foot horizontal resolution—to delineate the area flooded at each 0.5-foot interval 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, in addition to post-flood recovery efforts.

Georgia↗

USGS2015

StreamStats in Georgia: A water-resources web application

Summary Part of the mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to provide information on streamflow in the Nation's streams to help understand the Nation's water resources. Streamflow statistics are used by water managers, engineers, scientists, and others to protect people and property during floods and droughts, and to manage, protect, and enhance water resources. StreamStats is a Web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) application that was created by the USGS, in cooperation with the Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., that allows users to easily obtain streamflow statistics, basin characteristics, and descriptive information for USGS streamgages and user-selected ungaged locations on streams (Ries and others, 2008). StreamStats is being implemented on a State-by-State basis to allow for customization of the data development and underlying datasets to address their specific needs, issues, and objectives. The USGS, in cooperation with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division and Georgia Department of Transportation, has implemented StreamStats for Georgia. The Georgia StreamStats Web site is available through the national StreamStats Web-page portal at http://streamstats.usgs.gov. Links are provided on this Web page for individual State applications, instructions for using StreamStats, definitions of basin characteristics and streamflow statistics, and other supporting information.

Georgia↗

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↗

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↗

USGS2008

Evaluation of floodplain modifications to reduce the effect of floods using a two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the Flint River at Albany, Georgia

Potential flow characteristics of future flooding along a 4.8-mile reach of the Flint River in Albany, Georgia, were simulated using recent digital-elevation-model data and the U.S. Geological Survey finite-element surface-water modeling system for two-dimensional flow in the horizontal plane (FESWMS-2DH). The model was run at four water-surface altitudes at the Flint River at Albany streamgage (02352500): 181.5-foot (ft) altitude with a flow of 61,100 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s), 184.5-ft altitude with a flow of 75,400 ft 3 /s, 187.5-ft altitude with a flow of 91,700 ft 3 /s, and 192.5-ft altitude with a flow of 123,000 ft 3 /s. The model was run to measure changes in inundated areas and water-surface altitudes for eight scenarios of possible modifications to the 4.8-mile reach on the Flint River. The eight scenarios include removing a human-made peninsula located downstream from Oglethorpe Boulevard, increasing the opening under the Oakridge Drive bridge, adding culverts to the east Oakridge Drive bridge approach, adding culverts to the east and west Oakridge Drive bridge approaches, adding an overflow across the oxbow north of Oakridge Drive, making the overflow into a channel, removing the Oakridge Drive bridge, and adding a combination of an oxbow overflow and culverts on both Oakridge Drive bridge approaches. The modeled inundation and water-surface altitude changes were mapped for use in evaluating the river modifications. The most effective scenario at reducing inundated area was the combination scenario. At the 187.5-ft altitude, the inundated area decreased from 4.24 square miles to 4.00 square miles. The remove-peninsula scenario was the least effective with a reduction in inundated area of less than 0.01 square miles. In all scenarios, the inundated area reduction increased with water-surface altitude, peaking at the 187.5-ft altitude. The inundated area reduction then decreased at the gage altitude of 192.5 ft.

Georgia↗

USGS2007

Two-Dimensional Flood-Inundation Model of the Flint River at Albany, Georgia

Georgia↗