Flash floods of August 10, 2009, in the Villages of Gowanda and Silver Creek, New York

Carolyn O. Szabo; William F. Coon; Thomas A. Niziol

doi:10.3133/sir20105259

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20105259

Flash floods of August 10, 2009, in the Villages of Gowanda and Silver Creek, New York

Carolyn O. Szabo·William F. Coon·Thomas A. Niziol

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Late during the night of August 9, 2009, two storm systems intersected over western New York and produced torrential rain that caused severe flash flooding during the early morning hours of August 10 in parts of Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, and Erie Counties. Nearly 6 inches of rain fell in 1.5 hours as recorded by a National Weather Service weather observer in Perrysburg, which lies between Gowanda and Silver Creek-the communities that suffered the most damage. This storm intensity had an annual exceedance probability of less than 0.2 percent (recurrence interval greater than 500 years). Although flooding along Cattaraugus Creek occurred elsewhere, Cattaraugus Creek was responsible for very little flooding in Gowanda. Rather the small tributaries, Thatcher Brook and Grannis Brook, caused the flooding in Gowanda, as did Silver Creek and Walnut Creek in the Village of Silver Creek. Damages from the flooding were widespread. Numerous road culverts were washed out, and more than one-quarter of the roads in Cattaraugus County were damaged. Many people were evacuated or rescued in Gowanda and Silver Creek, and two deaths occurred during the flood in Gowanda. The water supplies of both communities were compromised by damages to village reservoirs and water-transmission infrastructures. Water and mud damage to residential and commercial properties was extensive. The tri-county area was declared a Federal disaster area and more than $45 million in Federal disaster assistance was distributed to more than 1,500 individuals and an estimated 1,100 public projects. The combined total estimate of damages from the flash floods was greater than $90 million. Over 240 high-water marks were surveyed by the U.S. Geological Survey; a subset of these marks was used to create flood-water-surface profiles for four streams and to delineate the areal extent of flooding in Gowanda and Silver Creek. Flood elevations exceeded previously defined 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability (500-year recurrence interval) elevations by 2 to 4 feet in Gowanda and as much as 6 to 8 feet in Silver Creek. Most of the high-water marks were used in indirect hydraulic computations to estimate peak flows for four streams. The peak flows in Grannis Brook and Thatcher Brook were computed, using the slope-area method, to be 1,400 and 7,600 cubic feet per second, respectively, and peak flow in Silver Creek was computed, using the width-contraction method, to be 19,500 cubic feet per second. The annual exceedance probabilities for flows in these and other basins with small drainage areas that fell almost entirely within the area of heaviest precipitation were less than 0.2 percent (or recurrence intervals greater than 500 years). The peak flow in Cattaraugus Creek at Gowanda was computed, using the slope-area method, to be 33,200 cubic feet per second with an annual exceedance probability of 2.2 percent (recurrence interval of 45 years).

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 42° to 43° latitude; -80° to -78° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Carolyn O. Szabo, William F. Coon, Thomas A. Niziol. 2011. Flash floods of August 10, 2009, in the Villages of Gowanda and Silver Creek, New York. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20105259

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Monitoring recreation on federally managed lands and waters—Aspects of visitor use

Federally managed public lands and waters receive around 1 billion recreational visits each year. Data on these visitors can aid in guiding policy decisions, managing resources effectively, and communicating the economic contributions of lands and waters. This report explores the methods used by agencies to collect data on aspects of recreational visitor use to Federal lands and waters (apart from visitation numbers, which are the focus of a companion publication). Aspects of recreational visitor use include visitor demographics, recreational activity participation, visitor satisfaction, visitor attitudes and experiences, trip characteristics, and economic contributions. We review practices used to understand aspects of visitor use across seven Federal agencies, revealing similarities such as the use of visitor intercept surveys and coverage of similar topic areas, and differences in how survey programs are operationalized and how specific questions on visitor surveys are worded. We also evaluate emerging technologies, such as geolocated social media and mobile device location data, for their potential to aid in understanding aspects of visitor use. This report concludes with potential opportunities to enhance data collection and coordination, ensuring cost-effective data collection and informed decision making.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Evaluation of best management practices at an edge-of-field site in the Eagle Creek watershed, Ohio, 2012–20

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey worked in partnership with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to identify farm fields in priority watersheds—watersheds critically important to Great Lake health. Intensive best management practices were implemented in five States to test the efficacy of best management practices, also referred to as agricultural conservation practices, to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff on agricultural fields. These fields were chosen as representatives of the priority watersheds because their farming practices and geographical conditions were common among farms in those watersheds. A farm site located near Findlay, Ohio, in the Eagle Creek watershed used two conservation practices, cover crop (Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 340) and variable rate technology (VRT; Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 590), which represent common practices in the Maumee priority watershed. This study monitored surface runoff and subsurface tile runoff at the Eagle Creek watershed site. The effects of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on sediment and nutrient runoff were assessed from October 2012 to September 2020. Cover crops were applied in fall of 2016, 2017, and 2018, coinciding with VRT applications. The following parameters were analyzed as part of the study: runoff discharge; peak discharge; and concentrations and loads of total phosphorus, particulate phosphorus, dissolved reactive phosphorus, and suspended sediment. High peak runoff events disproportionally affected nutrient concentrations and loads in runoff. A threshold of the 85th percentile of the peak discharge was chosen to assess the effect of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on nutrient mitigation at each gage. Runoff events below the 85th percentile were considered small, and runoff events over the 85th percentile were considered large. Concentrations from collected water-quality samples were used for the analysis; estimated concentrations were excluded from the statistical evaluation. All surface runoff parameters during small runoff events, except surface runoff volume, were significantly lower in the period with cover crops and VRT implementation. Contrarily, subsurface runoff parameters during small events were not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. Surface and subsurface parameters during large events were also not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. These results indicate cover crops and VRT may improve water quality during small runoff events, but additional best management practices that mitigate large runoff events may lead to greater water-quality improvement given the contribution of large events to overall losses.

Ohio↗

USGS2026

Continuous monitoring and temporal variability of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter in karst groundwater of the Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, 2019–24

Widespread urbanization on the Edwards aquifer recharge zone in south-central Texas has prompted the development of new approaches and tools for evaluating the current and future status of water quality in the San Antonio and Barton Springs segments of the Edwards aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System and the City of Austin, applied continuous monitoring of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter (fDOM) to characterize the sources and transport of dissolved organic matter and associated constituents in the Edwards aquifer. Continuous fDOM time-series data were adjusted using empirically derived temperature, turbidity, and inner-filter-effect correction factors prior to analysis and interpretation. Fully corrected fDOM time-series data from the study sites were evaluated for short- and long-term temporal variability in fDOM in the context of the hydrologic and climatic conditions that occurred during the 5-year study period to understand vulnerability of the aquifer to potential contaminants in recharge. Study results indicate that fDOM is an effective proxy for dissolved organic carbon that, in turn, is indicative of the influx of recent surface water and associated contaminants, and thus, aquifer vulnerability to those contaminants. Although other continuously monitored water-quality parameters provide insights into changes in water quality in response to varying hydrologic conditions, the quantitative relation between fDOM and dissolved organic carbon directly indicates the timing and magnitude of pulses of organic constituents derived from the land surface, whereas other water-quality parameters do not.

Texas↗