USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Hydrologic Unit”

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 1,387 records · Page 77Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Floods of Selected Streams in Arkansas, Spring 2008

Floods can cause loss of life and extensive destruction to property. Monitoring floods and understanding the reasons for their occurrence are the responsibility of many Federal agencies. The National Weather Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Geological Survey are among the most visible of these agencies. Together, these three agencies collect and analyze floodflow information to better understand the variety of mechanisms that cause floods, and how the characteristics and frequencies of floods vary with time and location. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has monitored and assessed the quantity of streamflow in our Nation's streams since the agency's inception in 1879. Because of ongoing collection and assessment of streamflow data, the USGS can provide information about a range of surface-water issues including the suitability of water for public supply and irrigation and the effects of agriculture and urbanization on streamflow. As part of its streamflow-data collection activities, the USGS measured streamflow in multiple streams during extreme flood events in Arkansas in the spring of 2008. The analysis of streamflow information collected during flood events such as these provides a scientific basis for decision making related to resource management and restoration. Additionally, this information can be used by water-resource managers to better define flood-hazard areas and to design bridges, culverts, dams, levees, and other structures. Water levels (stage) and streamflow (discharge) currently are being monitored in near real-time at approximately 150 locations in Arkansas. The streamflow-gaging stations measure and record hydrologic data at 15-minute or hourly intervals; the data then are transmitted through satellites to the USGS database and displayed on the internet every 1 to 4 hours. Streamflow-gaging stations in Arkansas are part of a network of over 7,500 active streamflow-gaging stations operated by the USGS throughout the United States in cooperation with other Federal, State, and local government agencies. In Arkansas, the major supporters of the streamflow-gaging network are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Arkansas Natural Resources Commission, Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, and Arkansas Geological Survey. Many other Federal, State, and local government entities provide additional support for streamflow-gaging stations. It is the combined support of the USGS and all funding partners that make it possible to maintain an adequate streamflow-gaging network in Arkansas. Data collected over the years at streamflow-gaging stations can be used to characterize the relative magnitude of flood events and their statistical frequency of occurrence. These analyses provide water-resource managers with accurate and reliable hydrologic information based on present and historical flow conditions. Continued collection of streamflow data, with consideration of changes in land use, agricultural practices, and climate change, will help scientists to more accurately characterize the magnitude of extreme floods in the future.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2006

Simulated Effects of Seasonal Ground-Water Pumpage for Irrigation on Hydrologic Conditions in the Lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, Southwestern Georgia and Parts of Alabama and Florida, 1999-2002

To determine the effects of seasonal ground-water pumpage for irrigation, a finite-element ground-water flow model was developed for the Upper Floridan aquifer in the lower Flint River Basin area, including adjacent parts of the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola River Basins. The model simulates withdrawal from the aquifer at 3,280 irrigation, municipal, and industrial wells; stream-aquifer flow between the aquifer and 36 area streams; leakage to and from the overlying upper semiconfining unit; regional ground-water flow at the lateral boundaries of the model; and water-table recharge in areas where the aquifer is at or near land surface. Steady-state calibration to drought conditions of October 1999 indicated that the model could adequately simulate measured groundwater levels at 275 well locations and streamflow gains and losses along 53 reaches of area streams. A transient simulation having 12 monthly stress periods from March 2001 to February 2002 incorporated time-varying stress from irrigation pumpage, stream and lake stage, head in the overlying upper semiconfining unit, and infiltration rates. Analysis of simulated water budgets of the Upper Floridan aquifer provides estimates of the source of water pumped for irrigation. During October 1999, an estimated 127 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of irrigation pumpage from the Upper Floridan aquifer in the model area were simulated to be derived from changes in: stream-aquifer flux (about 56 Mgal/d, or 44 percent); leakage to or from the upper semiconfining unit (about 49 Mgal/d, or 39 percent); regional flow (about 18 Mgal/d, or 14 percent); leakage to or from Lakes Seminole and Blackshear (about 2.7 Mgal/d, or 2 percent); and flux at the Upper Floridan aquifer updip boundary (about 1.8 Mgal/d, or 1 percent). During the 2001 growing season (May-August), estimated irrigation pumpage ranged from about 310 to 830 Mgal/ d, about 79 percent of the 12-month total. During the growing season, irrigation pumpage was derived from decreased discharge or increased recharge of stream-aquifer flux (from about 23 to 39 percent), leakage to or from the upper semiconfining unit (from about 30 to 36 percent), regional flow (from about 8 to 11 percent), Lakes Seminole and Blackshear (about 2 percent), and flux at the Upper Floridan aquifer updip boundary (about 1 percent). Storage effects (decreased storage gain or increased storage loss) contributed from about 11 to 36 percent of irrigation pumpage during the growing season. Water managers can use the model to determine where and how much additional ground-water pumpage for irrigation should be permitted based on a variety of hydrologic constraints. For example, the model results may indicate that in some critical locations, additional ground-water pumpage during a prolonged drought might reduce stream-aquifer flux enough to cause noncompliance of established minimum instream flow conditions.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia↗
USGS2010

Surficial geologic map of the Amboy 30' x 60' quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California

The surficial geologic map of the Amboy 30' x 60' quadrangle presents characteristics of surficial materials for an area of approximately 5,000 km2 in the eastern Mojave Desert of southern California. This map consists of new surficial mapping conducted between 2000 and 2007, as well as compilations from previous surficial mapping. Surficial geologic units are mapped and described based on depositional process and age categories that reflect the mode of deposition, pedogenic effects following deposition, and, where appropriate, the lithologic nature of the material. Many physical properties were noted and measured during the geologic mapping. This information was used to classify surficial deposits and to understand their ecological importance. We focus on physical properties that drive hydrologic, biologic, and physical processes such as particle-size distribution (PSD) and bulk density. The database contains point data representing locations of samples for both laboratory determined physical properties and semiquantitative field-based information in the database. We include the locations of all field observations and note the type of information collected in the field to help assist in assessing the quality of the mapping. The publication is separated into three parts: documentation, spatial data, and printable map graphics of the database. Documentation includes this pamphlet, which provides a discussion of the surficial geology and units and the map. Spatial data are distributed as ArcGIS Geodatabase in Microsoft Access format and are accompanied by a readme file, which describes the database contents, and FGDC metadata for the spatial map information. Map graphics files are distributed as Postscript and Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files that provide a view of the spatial database at the mapped scale.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2010

Surficial geologic map of the Amboy 30' x 60' quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California

The surficial geologic map of the Amboy 30' x 60' quadrangle presents characteristics of surficial materials for an area of approximately 5,000 km 2 in the eastern Mojave Desert of southern California. This map consists of new surficial mapping conducted between 2000 and 2007, as well as compilations from previous surficial mapping. Surficial geologic units are mapped and described based on depositional process and age categories that reflect the mode of deposition, pedogenic effects following deposition, and, where appropriate, the lithologic nature of the material. Many physical properties were noted and measured during the geologic mapping. This information was used to classify surficial deposits and to understand their ecological importance. We focus on physical properties that drive hydrologic, biologic, and physical processes such as particle-size distribution (PSD) and bulk density. The database contains point data representing locations of samples for both laboratory determined physical properties and semiquantitative field-based information in the database. We include the locations of all field observations and note the type of information collected in the field to help assist in assessing the quality of the mapping. The publication is separated into three parts: documentation, spatial data, and printable map graphics of the database. Documentation includes this pamphlet, which provides a discussion of the surficial geology and units and the map. Spatial data are distributed as ArcGIS Geodatabase in Microsoft Access format and are accompanied by a readme file, which describes the database contents, and FGDC metadata for the spatial map information. Map graphics files are distributed as Postscript and Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files that provide a view of the spatial database at the mapped scale.

California↗
USGS2000

Water Resources Data Massachusetts and Rhode Island Water Year 1999

INTRODUCTION The Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the water resources of Massachusetts and Rhode Island each water year. These data, accumulated during many water years, constitute a valuable data base for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the States. To make these data readily available to interested parties outside the Geological Survey, the data are published annually in this report series entitled 'Water Resources Data-Massachusetts and Rhode Island.' Hydrologic data are also available through the Massachusetts-Rhode Island District Home Page on the world-wide web (http://ma.water.usgs.gov). Historical data and real-time data (for sites equipped with satellite gage-height telemeter) are also available. The home page also contains a link to the U.S. Geological Survey National Home Page where streamflow data from locations throughout the United States can be retrieved. This report series includes records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; contents of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of ground-water wells; and water quality of ground-water wells. This volume contains discharge records at 90 gaging stations; stage records at 2 gaging stations; monthend contents of 4 lakes and reservoirs; water quality at 31 gaging stations; water quality at 27 observation wells; and water levels for 139 observation wells. Locations of these sites are shown in figures 1 and 2. Short-term water-quality data were collected at 21 gaging stations and 27 observation wells and are shown in figure 3. Miscellaneous hydrologic data were collected at various sites that were not involved in the systematic data-collection program and are published as miscellaneous discharge measurements. The data in this report represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. This series of annual reports for Massachusetts and Rhode Island began with the 1961 water year with a report that contained only data relating to the quantities of surface water. For the 1964 water year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to present, in one volume, data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface and ground water, and ground-water levels. Prior to introduction of this series and for several water years concurrent with it, water-resources data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. Data on stream discharge and stage and on lake or reservoir contents and stage, through September 1960, were published annually under the title 'Surface-Water Supply of the United States, Parts 1A and 1B.' For the 1961 through 1970 water years, the data were published in two 5-year reports. Data on chemical quality, temperature, and suspended sediment for the 1941 through 1970 water years were published annually under the title 'Quality of Surface Waters of the United States,' and water levels for the 1939 through 1974 water years were published under the title 'Ground-Water Levels in the United States.' The above mentioned Water-Supply Papers may be consulted in the libraries of the principal cities of the United States and may be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services, Box 25286, Denver Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225-0286. Publications similar to this report are published annually by the Geological Survey for all States. These official Survey reports have an identification number consisting of the two-letter State abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, this volume is identified as 'U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report MARI-98-1.' For archiving and general d

Water Data Report↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Mean Annual R-factor, 1971-2000

This data set represents the average annual R-factor, rainfall-runoff erosivity measure, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data are from Christopher Daly of the Spatial Climate Analysis Service, Oregon State University, and George Taylor of the Oregon Climate Service, Oregon State University (2002), who developed spatially distributed estimates of R-factor for the period 1971-2000 for the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2021

Assessment of water availability in the Osage Nation using an integrated hydrologic-flow model

The Osage Nation of northeastern Oklahoma, conterminous with Osage County, covers about 2,900 square miles. The area is primarily rural with 62 percent of the land being native prairie grass, and much of the area is used for cattle ranching and extraction of petroleum and natural gas. Protection of water rights are important to the Osage Nation because of its reliance on cattle ranching and the potential for impairment of water quality by petroleum extraction. Additionally, the potential for future population increases, demands for water from neighboring areas such as the Tulsa metropolitan area, and expansion of petroleum and natural-gas extraction on water resources of this area further the need for the Osage Nation to better understand its water availability. Therefore, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Osage Nation, completed a hydrologic investigation to assess the status and availability of surface-water and groundwater resources in the Osage Nation. A transient integrated hydrologic-flow model was constructed using the U.S. Geological Survey fully integrated hydrologic-flow model called the MODFLOW One-Water Hydrologic Model. The integrated hydrologic-flow model, called the Osage Nation Integrated Hydrologic Model (ONIHM), was constructed and uses an orthogonal grid of 276 rows and 289 columns, and each grid cell measures 1,312.34 feet (ft; 400 meters) per side, with eight variably thick vertical layers that represented the alluvial and bedrock aquifers within the study area, including the alluvial aquifer, the Vamoosa-Ada aquifer, and the minor Pennsylvanian bedrock aquifers, and the confining units. Landscape and groundwater-flow processes were simulated for two periods: (1) the 1950–2014 period from January 1950 through September 2014 and (2) the forecast period from October 2014 through December 2099. The 1950–2014 period ONIHM simulated past conditions using measured or estimated inputs, and the forecast-period ONIHM simulated three separate potential forecast conditions under constant dry, average, or wet climate conditions using calibrated input values from the 1950–2014 period ONIHM. The 1950–2014 period ONIHM was calibrated by linking the Parameter Estimation software (PEST) with the MODFLOW One-Water Hydrologic Model. PEST uses statistical parameter estimation techniques to identify the best set of parameter values to minimize the difference between measured or estimated calibration targets and their simulated equivalent values (residuals). Tikhonov regularization and singular-value decomposition-assist features of PEST were used during the calibration process. The 1950–2014 period ONIHM was calibrated to 713 measured groundwater levels at 195 wells; 95,636 estimated monthly mean groundwater levels at 124 wells; 5,307 measured streamflows at 13 streamgages; and 8,679 simulated mean monthly streamflows at 10 streamgages extracted from a surface-water model by adjusting 231 parameters. The estimated groundwater-level observations and streamflows were included as observations to improve the spatial and temporal density of observation targets during calibration. The best set of parameter values obtained during the calibration process of the 1950–2014 model was then used as the input parameter values for the forecast model simulations. A comparison of the calibration targets to their corresponding simulated values indicated that the model adequately reproduced streamflows and groundwater levels for some streamgages and wells and underestimated streamflows and groundwater levels at other locations. Measured and simulated streamflows correlated adequately with a coefficient of determination of 0.938, as did water levels with a coefficient of determination of 0.795. The 1950–2014 period ONIHM underestimated certain groundwater levels and streamflows, but generally measured or estimated calibration targets correlated well with simulated equivalents, which indicated that the model can adequately simulate the response of the hydrologic system to stresses in the 1950–2014 and forecast periods. In the 1950–2014 period ONIHM, the calibrated mean horizontal hydraulic conductivity for layer 1 alluvial aquifer was 30.7 feet per day, and the seven lower layers had a calibrated mean horizontal hydraulic conductivity of less than 3.3 feet per day. The mean calibrated groundwater-level residual was 16.6 ft, and the mean calibrated streamflow residual of the Arkansas River at Ralston, Oklahoma, streamgage (U.S. Geological Survey station 07152500) was within 6 percent (373 cubic feet per second) of mean measured streamflow for the 1950–2014 period ONIHM. The ONIHM simulated landscape fluxes of precipitation; groundwater applied by irrigation wells; evapotranspiration from precipitation, groundwater, and irrigation; runoff from precipitation; and deep percolation from precipitation. The largest loss of water from the landscape was evapotranspiration from precipitation with a calibrated mean annual outflow of 32 inches (in.): mean annual precipitation was about 36 in. Calibrated mean annual runoff and deep percolation (recharge to the water table) rates were 4.7 inches per year (in/yr) and 0.70 in/yr, respectively, for the 1950–2014 period ONIHM. The calibrated 1950–2014 period ONIHM groundwater fluxes included net farm net recharge (calculated as the difference between the inflow of recharge to the water table and the outflow of evapotranspiration from the water table such that negative values indicate that evapotranspiration from the water table was greater than deep percolation [recharge to the water table] and vice versa). Net farm net recharge was the largest flux from the groundwater system with a mean annual net outflow of 153.4 cubic feet per second. Stream leakage was the largest flux to the groundwater system with a mean annual net inflow of 152.5 cubic feet per second, indicating that, on average, the groundwater/surface-water interaction was a “losing” system where stream water leaked into the subsurface and recharged the water table. Simulated monthly trends demonstrated that net stream leakage was the largest inflow to the groundwater-flow system for 10 of the 12 months; for the other 2 months (January and March), farm net recharge (January) and net storage (March) were the largest inflow to the groundwater-flow system. A saline groundwater interface map was created for the study and compared to the water levels from the final stress period of the 1950–2014 model to identify the presence of fresh/marginal groundwater throughout the study area. Fresh/marginal groundwater was characterized as groundwater with less than 1,500 milligrams per liter of total dissolved solids. Fresh/marginal groundwater thickness ranged from 0 to 438.2 ft within the study area. The thickest regions of fresh/marginal groundwater were in the eastern part of the study area near Sand Creek, Bird Creek, and Hominy Creek and in the Arkansas River alluvial aquifer in the region downstream from the Arkansas River at Ralston, Okla. Like the 1950–2014 model, forecast model results for the landscape indicated that transpiration from precipitation was the largest flux out of the landscape for all three forecasts, constituting 77, 73, and 58 percent of precipitation for the dry, average, and wet forecasts, respectively. The dry and average forecast landscape fluxes demonstrated similar trends and magnitudes, whereas the wet forecast landscape fluxes indicated the largest changes compared to the average forecast fluxes. Most notably, runoff increased from a mean of 1.1 and 1.6 in/yr for the dry and average forecasts, respectively, to 10 in/yr for the wet forecast. Similar changes occurred for the other wet forecast landscape fluxes. The calibrated 1950–2014 period ONIHM simulated three forecasts to assess the effects of potential climatic changes on the hydrologic system from October 2014 to December 2099. The three forecasts simulated theoretical dry, average, and wet conditions using precipitation and potential evapotranspiration datasets from selected years in the calibrated 1950–2014 period ONIHM. Annual precipitation amounts were 26.89, 35.47, and 50.73 in. for the dry, average, and wet forecasts, respectively. Groundwater-flow component forecast results indicated that stream leakage is always a net inflow to the groundwater-flow system for dry, average, and wet conditions, meaning the study area stream network is always predominantly a “losing” regime where stream water infiltrates into the underlying aquifer. Storage was only a net outflow from the groundwater-flow system and indicated a replenishment to groundwater storage that resulted in an increase in groundwater levels only during the wet forecast. Further, these gains in groundwater storage for the wet forecast occurred only during February through June. Mean fresh/marginal groundwater saturated thicknesses were 125 and 126 ft for the dry and average forecast conditions, respectively, and wet forecast average thickness was 145 ft and ranged from 0 to 443 ft. The spatial extents of fresh/marginal groundwater at the end of the dry, average, and wet forecast model periods (December 2099) did not change substantially from the end of the 1950–2014 model period (September 2014).

Kansas, Oklahoma↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Base-Flow Index

This tabular data set represents the mean base-flow index expressed as a percent, compiled for every catchment in NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. Base flow is the component of streamflow that can be attributed to ground-water discharge into streams. The source data set is Base-Flow Index for the Conterminous United States (Wolock, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Mean Infiltration-Excess Overland Flow, 2002

This tabular data set represents the mean value for infiltration-excess overland flow as estimated by the watershed model TOPMODEL, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. Infiltration-excess overland flow, expressed as a percent of total overland flow, is simulated in TOPMODEL as precipitation that exceeds the infiltration capacity of the soil and enters the stream channel. The source data set is Infiltration-Excess Overland Flow Estimated by TOPMODEL for the Conterminous United States (Wolock, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDplus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Population Density, 2000

This data set represents the average population density, in number of people per square kilometer multiplied by 10 for the year 2000, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data set is the 2000 Population Density by Block Group for the Conterminous United States (Hitt, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Estimated Mean Annual Natural Groundwater Recharge, 2002

This data set represents the mean annual natural groundwater recharge, in millimeters, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data set is Estimated Mean Annual Natural Ground-Water Recharge in the Conterminous United States (Wolock, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, containing NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Level 3 Ecoregions

This data set represents the estimated area of level 3 ecological landscape regions (ecoregions), as defined by Omernik (1987), compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data set is Level III Ecoregions of the Continental United States (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2002

Investigation of the geology and hydrology of the upper and middle Verde River watershed of central Arizona: A project of the Arizona Rural Watershed Initiative

The upper and middle Verde River watershed in west-central Arizona is an area rich in natural beauty and cultural history and is an increasingly popular destination for tourists, recreationists, and permanent residents seeking its temperate climate. The diverse terrain of the region includes broad desert valleys, upland plains, forested mountain ranges, narrow canyons, and riparian areas along perennial stream reaches. The area is predominantly in Yavapai County, which in 1999 was the fastest-growing rural county in the United States (Woods and Poole Economics, Inc., 1999); by 2050, the population is projected to more than double. Such growth will increase demands on water resources. The domestic, industrial, and recreational interests of the population will need to be balanced against protection of riparian, woodland, and other natural areas and their associated wildlife and aquatic habitats. Sound management decisions will be required that are based on an understanding of the interactions between local and regional aquifers, surface-water bodies, and recharge and discharge areas. This understanding must include the influence of climate, geology, topography, and cultural development on those components of the hydrologic system. In 1999, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR), initiated a regional investigation of the hydrogeology of the upper and middle Verde River watershed. The project is part of the Rural Watershed Initiative (RWI), a program established by the State of Arizona and managed by the ADWR that addresses water supply issues in rural areas while encouraging participation from stakeholder groups in affected communities. The USGS is performing similar RWI investigations on the Colorado Plateau to the north and in the Mogollon Highlands to the east of the Verde River study area (Parker and Flynn, 2000). The objectives of the RWI investigations are to develop: (1) a single database containing all hydrogeologic data available for the combined areas, (2) an understanding of the geologic units and structures in each area with a focus on how geology influences the storage and movement of ground water, (3) a conceptual model that describes where and how much water enters, flows through, and exits the hydrogeologic system, and (4) a numerical ground-water flow model that can be used to improve understanding of the hydrogeologic system and to test the effects of various scenarios of water-resources development. In 2001, Yavapai County became an additional cooperator in the upper and middle Verde River RWI investigation.

Arizona↗
USGS2025

Overcoming challenges in mapping hydrography and heterogeneity in urban landscapes

Understanding how water moves through a watershed is one of the most fundamental yet often complicated aspects of hydrology, especially in urban areas. Urban infrastructure and water management alter natural hydrological pathways in developed watersheds, which can violate assumptions of a watershed approach to ecosystem science. We focus on two aspects of urban landscapes that often create challenges to model watershed processes within and among urban areas: (1) accurate delineation of urban flow paths and (2) consistent characterisation of the urban landscape within and among cities. Here, we describe these challenges and identify how certain components of these challenges can be addressed, highlighting examples and lessons learned in a project that is assessing scales and drivers of variability in dissolved organic carbon across five urban centres in the United States. Our goal is to facilitate a dialogue that will advance the applications of watershed approaches in urban ecosystem science by recognising and addressing these challenges. Our examples focus on the United States but could be applicable to similar urban challenges in other locations globally.

Florida, Massachusetts, Utah↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Nutrient Inputs from Fertilizer and Manure, Nitrogen and Phosphorus (N&P), 2002

This data set represents the estimated amount of nitrogen and phosphorus in kilograms for the year 2002, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data set is County-Level Estimates of Nutrient Inputs to the Land Surface of the Conterminous United States, 1982-2001 (Ruddy and others, 2006). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS1994

Model for dolomite formation in northwest Florida

Petrographic methods are used to examine the nature of the Floridan post-Oligocene unconformity and diagenetic responses in the associated carbonate units. The study addresses the depositional environment and the character of sediments associated with the unconformity, types and timing of diagenetic changes, and mode of dolomitization for the Suwannee Limestone dolomites and basal Hawthorn Group dolosilts. The purpose of the study is to determine if the original texture of geologic materials is preserved more frequently in rocks deposited in a supratidal environment in the uppermost Floridan carbonates, to examine possible sources of magnesium for the dolomitization that has occurred in the Floridan aquifer, and to determine the chemical environment of dolomite formation. On the basis of lithology, the tri-county study area can be divided into two regions; one in which the uppermost Floridan carbonate is calcareous or locally silicified, and one in which the aquifer system is capped with dolomite. Lateral interfingering between the two regions is apparent, and it is inferred that the boundary between the limestone and dolomite represents a geochemical boundary between a mixed marine and freshwater environment and a subaerially exposed freshwater environment. Where dolomite has replaced the uppermost Suwannee Limestone, the dolomite is overlain by a thin unit of dolosilt. The predominant source of magnesium for the dolomitization that occurred in the study area is probably seawater.

Journal of Hydrology↗
USGS2009

Channel water balance and exchange with subsurface flow along a mountain headwater stream in Montana, United States

Channel water balances of contiguous reaches along streams represent a poorly understood scale of stream-subsurface interaction. We measured reach water balances along a headwater stream in Montana, United States, during summer base flow recessions. Reach water balances were estimated from series of tracer tests in 13 consecutive reaches delineated evenly along a 2.6 km valley segment. For each reach, we estimated net change in discharge, gross hydrologic loss, and gross hydrologic gain from tracer dilution and mass recovery. Four series of tracer tests were performed during relatively high, intermediate, and low base flow conditions. The relative distribution of channel water along the stream was strongly related to a transition in valley structure, with a general increase in gross losses through the recession. During tracer tests at intermediate and low flows, there were frequent substantial losses of tracer mass (>10%) that could not be explained by net loss in flow over the reach, indicating that many of the study reaches were concurrently losing and gaining water. For example, one reach with little net change in discharge exchanged nearly 20% of upstream flow with gains and losses along the reach. These substantial bidirectional exchanges suggest that some channel interactions with subsurface flow paths were not measurable by net change in flow or transient storage of recovered tracer. Understanding bidirectional channel water balances in stream reaches along valleys is critical to an accurate assessment of stream solute fate and transport and to a full assessment of exchanges between the stream channel and surrounding subsurface.

Montana↗
USGS2022

Assessment of cropland inundation due to the operation of the Reelfoot Lake spillway in West Tennessee

Running Reelfoot Bayou (RRB) is the outlet canal of Reelfoot Lake, the largest natural lake in Tennessee. RRB is not able to contain discharge from Reelfoot Lake greater than the bankfull discharge of 28 m 3 /s (1000 ft 3 /s), which typically occurs at the beginning of the growing season (April–June). Historically, the planting of crops has been delayed until flooding subsides and cropland has drained. The objective of this study is a preliminary quantification of cropland inundation to determine its spatial distribution in the RRB floodplain. Inundated croplands in the RRB floodplain were delineated over a range of spillway discharges from 2 to 57 m 3 /s (70–2000 ft 3 /s), using one-dimensional–two-dimensional hydrodynamic modeling and multispectral satellite images (Landsat 8 and Sentinel-2). The composite maps made by combining the simulated and image-derived flood maps were overlaid on the United States Department of Agriculture CropScape layer to determine the inundation of individual summer crops during the growing season. About 25% of the inundated croplands are flooded at discharges of RRB less than 28 m 3 /s, implying wetland hydrology. The results of this analysis can be used to inform operational management of the Reelfoot Lake spillway.

Tennessee↗