A Hydraulic Modeling Framework for Producing Urban Flood Maps for Zanesville, Ohio

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Hydraulic Modeling Framework for Producing Urban Flood Maps for Zanesville, Ohio A Hydraulic Modeling Framework for Producing Urban Flood Maps for Zanesville, Ohio Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jeremiah Lant, B.S. Graduate Program in Geodetic Science The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Doug Alsdorf, Advisor Mike Durand C.K. Shum Copyright by Jeremiah Lant 2011 Abstract This project examines the flooding dynamics of the Muskingum River near the city of Zanesville, Ohio. Simulating various peak flood events using a hydrodynamic model will provide Muskingum County engineers with valuable information regarding inundated areas, extent, and effect on local communities for different flood events. The impact of various Muskingum River flood events, including the 100 year flood, on the urban environment in Zanesville, Ohio is studied. The project provides a useful hydraulic modeling framework that produces urban flooding maps for the city of Zanesville. These flood maps show how water surface elevations and water depths vary spatially and temporally, and provide a more detailed picture of how flood waves move in urban environments. A hydrodynamic model called LISFLOOD-FP is used to simulate river flow and flooding. LISFLOOD-FP is a finite-difference flood inundation model that can accurately model 1D or 2D channel flow along with 2D floodplain flow. LISFLOOD-FP is a well-established hydrodynamic model that has been proven to properly simulate flood inundation for fluvial, coastal, and urban events. Modeling efforts demonstrate that better knowledge of discharge on the Muskingum River provides a valuable insight into how floods travel through the floodplain. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, conducts flood insurance studies to identify a community’s flood risk. The flood risk study is based upon statistical data for river flow, storm tides, hydrologic and hydraulic analyses, and rainfall and topographic surveys. The FEMA maps only provide a one-time snapshot of a flood, and do not describe the full extent of the flood event including the spatial and temporal variability ii of various flood events. Questions, such as the changes in flood inundation extent with time for the city of Zanesville, cannot be fully explored using the FEMA maps. It has been shown that accurate mapping of urban flooding events must take hydraulic connectivity and mass conservation into account (Bates, et al., 2005). In other words, extending potential flood elevations along lines of equal elevation given a river elevation, the so-called “Planar GIS method,” may be inadequate for characterizing urban flooding. An alternative approach involves the simulation of hydraulic processes, which would control flooding and inundation patterns in downtown Zanesville given the FEMA 100 year Muskingum River main stem water surface elevation. Such an approach provides the framework, not only for producing dynamic maps of different frequency flood events for the city of Zanesville, but also evaluating the impacts of adding and/or removing structures or changing land use on urban flooding. Model simulations of the 100 year flood defined by FEMA have been created as part of this research. In addition, a 1D HEC-RAS model was built to compare 100 year flood profiles with the 2D LISFLOOD-FP model. The LISFLOOD-FP model agrees with the FEMA flooding map in spatial extent, and in river height predictions to within 1 foot. A 1-D HEC-RAS model also agrees with both the FEMA and LISFLOOD-FP model predictions. Sensitivity tests indicate that a flood wave with a flow rate of 100,000 cubic feet per second would be required to inundate downtown Zanesville. The study of urban flooding on the Muskingum River also represents an opportunity to more fully understand the performance of the upcoming Surface Water Ocean Topography Mission, SWOT, over modest sized rivers in an urban environment. The iii SWOT satellite will measure water surface elevations and inundated areas for fresh water bodies around the world. The importance of flood events, like the 100 year flood, to river communities lies in the understanding and awareness of how peak floods occur and travel, especially in urban environments. From this, steps towards flood control and damage prevention can be made. The fully parameterized Muskingum River model will allow us to (1) produce urban flooding maps for Zanesville, (2) build a framework for sensitivity studies on impacts from urbanization and climate change, and (3) predict inundation throughout Zanesville, a city of 25,000 people. Key Words: hydrodynamic model; LISFLOOD-FP; Muskingum River; urban flooding; FEMA iv Dedication Dedicated to the students at Ohio State University v Ackowledgements Thank you to my advisor Prof. Doug Alsdorf, Prof. Mike Durand, and Dr. Kostas Andreadis for your wisdom and guidance. Your knowledge, insight, and expertise have made this research possible. I have learned so much from each of you. vi Vita 2006………………………………………… B.S. Physics, University of Kentucky 2009 to Present ……………………………...Graduate Research Associate Department of Earth Science, The Ohio State University Fields of Study Major Field: Geodetic Science vii Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................. ii Dedication ......................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... vi Vita ................................................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures ................................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Methods.......................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 3: Research Area and Model Simulations .................................................................... 11 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion .............................................................................................. 22 Chapter 5: Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 38 References ....................................................................................................................................... 40 viii List of Tables Table 1. Range of Friction Coefficients used by FEMA .......................................................... 17 Table 2. Comparison of Water Surface Elevations ................................................................... 23 ix List of Figures Figure 1. Muskingum River Watershed ......................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Flood Control Structures ................................................................................................ 3 Figure 3. FEMA Flood Map of Downtown Zanesville, Ohio .................................................. 5 Figure 4. Aerial Image of Research Area .................................................................................... 11 Figure 5. Sample Model Inputs .................................................................................................... 13 Figure 6. Processed Digital Elevation Model of Research Area.............................................. 16 Figure 7. Channel and Floodplain Friction Coefficient Map ................................................... 18 Figure 8. Input Hydrographs for FEMA 100 Year Flood Simulation ................................... 20 Figure 9. Triangular Irregular Network Map.............................................................................. 21 Figure 10. Water Surface Elevation Maps of FEMA 100 Year Flood Simulation ............... 25 Figure 11. Water Depth Maps of FEMA 100 Year Flood Simulation ................................... 26 Figure 12. Flood Extent Comparison between FEMA and LISFLOOD-FP ....................... 27 Figure 13. HEC-RAS Outputs of FEMA 100 Year Flood Simulation .................................. 29 Figure 14. Comparison of Water Surface Profiles ..................................................................... 30 Figure 15. Multiple Linearly Scaled Hydrographs ..................................................................... 32 Figure 16. Water Depth Maps ...................................................................................................... 33 Figure 17. Water Depth Map of Major Flood Inundation in Zanesville, Ohio .................... 34 Figure 18. Input Hydrographs for Streamstats 100 Year Flood Simulation.......................... 36 Figure 19. Water Depth Maps of Streamstats 100 Year Flood Simulation ........................... 37 x Chapter 1: Introduction Flooding continues to be a major natural disaster across the United States, capable of great damage and loss to property and life that can occur despite engineering
Recommended publications
  • FLOOD of AUGUST 1935 Dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER Z < 5
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Harold L. Ickes, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendenhall, Director Water-Supply Paper 869 FLOOD OF AUGUST 1935 dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER o O z < 5 BY i ;> ^, C. V. YOUNGQUIST AND W. B. WITH SECTIONS ON THE ASSOCIATES METEOROLOGY AND HYDROLOOT ^ ;j . » BY * V WALDO E. SMITH AND A. K. SHOWALTEK 2. Prepared in cooperation with the * ^* FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRAflCg^ OF PUBLIC WORKS ' -o j; UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1941 jFor sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. G. - * * « Price 40 cents (paper) CONTENTS Pag« Abstract---.--_-_-__-__-___--______.-__-_---_---_-__-_--_-__-.-_._ I Introduction.______________________________________________________ 1 Administration and personnel---_______--_-_____-__--____________-__ 3 Acknowledgments ________-________-----_--__--__-_________________ 3 Geography _ ____________________________________________________ 6 Topography, drainage, and transportation________________________ 6 Rainfall...--_---.-__-------.-_--------__..---_-----------_---- 7 Population, industry, and mineral resources_---_-__--_________--__ 8 Flood control-___-_-___-__-_-__-____-_--_-_-__--_--__.____--_- S General features of the flood-_______________________________________ 9 Damage.-__-_______--____-__--__--__-_-____--_______-____--__ IT Meteorologic and hydrologic conditions, by Waldo E. Smith____________ 19 General features of the storm.___-____-__________---_____--__--_ 19 Records of precipitation._______________________________________ 21 Antecedent
    [Show full text]
  • POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution
    POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CAMPAIGN 273 POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS Series editor Marcus Cowper © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 The strategic situation The Appalachian frontier The Ohio Indians Lord Dunmore’s Virginia CHRONOLOGY 17 OPPOSING COMMANDERS 20 Virginia commanders Indian commanders OPPOSING ARMIES 25 Virginian forces Indian forces Orders of battle OPPOSING PLANS 34 Virginian plans Indian plans THE CAMPAIGN AND BATTLE 38 From Baker’s trading post to Wakatomica From Wakatomica to Point Pleasant The battle of Point Pleasant From Point Pleasant to Fort Gower THE AFTERMATH 89 THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY 93 FURTHER READING 94 INDEX 95 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com 4 British North America in1774 British North NEWFOUNDLAND Lake Superior Quebec QUEBEC ISLAND OF NOVA ST JOHN SCOTIA Montreal Fort Michilimackinac Lake St Lawrence River MASSACHUSETTS Huron Lake Lake Ontario NEW Michigan Fort Niagara HAMPSHIRE Fort Detroit Lake Erie NEW YORK Boston MASSACHUSETTS RHODE ISLAND PENNSYLVANIA New York CONNECTICUT Philadelphia Pittsburgh NEW JERSEY MARYLAND Point Pleasant DELAWARE N St Louis Ohio River VANDALIA KENTUCKY Williamsburg LOUISIANA VIRGINIA ATLANTIC OCEAN NORTH CAROLINA Forts Cities and towns SOUTH Mississippi River CAROLINA Battlefields GEORGIA Political boundary Proposed or disputed area boundary
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Flood-Warning System and Flood-Inundation Mapping in Licking County, Ohio
    Prepared in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Transportation; U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; and the City of Newark and Village of Granville, Ohio Development of a Flood-Warning System and Flood-Inundation Mapping in Licking County, Ohio Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5137 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover photograph: Flooding from the South Fork Licking River, January 21, 1959, looking east along Interstate Route 70 at the State Route 79 interchange. The Ohio Historical Society (reproduced with permission). Development of a Flood-Warning System and Flood-Inundation Mapping in Licking County, Ohio By Chad J. Ostheimer Prepared in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Transportation; U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; and the City of Newark and Village of Granville, Ohio Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5137 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Ohio Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.
    [Show full text]
  • Along the Ohio Trail
    Along The Ohio Trail A Short History of Ohio Lands Dear Ohioan, Meet Simon, your trail guide through Ohio’s history! As the 17th state in the Union, Ohio has a unique history that I hope you will find interesting and worth exploring. As you read Along the Ohio Trail, you will learn about Ohio’s geography, what the first Ohioan’s were like, how Ohio was discovered, and other fun facts that made Ohio the place you call home. Enjoy the adventure in learning more about our great state! Sincerely, Keith Faber Ohio Auditor of State Along the Ohio Trail Table of Contents page Ohio Geography . .1 Prehistoric Ohio . .8 Native Americans, Explorers, and Traders . .17 Ohio Land Claims 1770-1785 . .27 The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 . .37 Settling the Ohio Lands 1787-1800 . .42 Ohio Statehood 1800-1812 . .61 Ohio and the Nation 1800-1900 . .73 Ohio’s Lands Today . .81 The Origin of Ohio’s County Names . .82 Bibliography . .85 Glossary . .86 Additional Reading . .88 Did you know that Ohio is Hi! I’m Simon and almost the same distance I’ll be your trail across as it is up and down guide as we learn (about 200 miles)? Our about the land we call Ohio. state is shaped in an unusual way. Some people think it looks like a flag waving in the wind. Others say it looks like a heart. The shape is mostly caused by the Ohio River on the east and south and Lake Erie in the north. It is the 35th largest state in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks & Greenspace
    2020 MUSKINGUM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Compiled by: Muskingum County Planning Commission Parks & Greenspace Report Parks & Greenspace Task Force Abstract State parks, forests, nature preserves, scenic waterways, and wildlife areas cover over 34,164 acres of land in Muskingum County. These assets contribute to the county’s tourism industry, which generates over $223,000,000 in annual sales revenue. Recreation contributes $15,000,000 to the local economy annually. Introduction Muskingum County is blessed with an abundance of green spaces. It is the 4th largest county in Ohio with a land mass of 664.6 square miles. Despite its size, the county is sparsely populated having around 86,000 residents. Just over 10% of the county’s land mass was listed as developed during the last census. In contrast, forests cover close to 55% of the land mass, and agriculture occupies just over 30%. The remainder of the county is dotted with scrub/shrub grasslands, wetlands, and open water (see Appendix A). State parks, forests, nature preserves, scenic waterways, and wildlife areas (see Appendix B for a detailed list) cover over 34,164 acres of land in Muskingum County. These assets contribute to the county’s tourism industry, which generates over $223,000,000 in annual sales revenue. Recreation contributes $15,000,000 to the local economy annually. Methodology Muskingum County residents actively participate in outdoor recreation. Understanding the vision of the public for Muskingum County Parks and Green Spaces is paramount. After all, the public is the owner of its community. The Parks and Green Spaces planning process began with a S.W.O.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Biological and Water Quality Report - Wills
    Division of Surface Water June 2019 TMDL DEVELOPMENT | Draft Biological and Water Quality Report - Wills Creek and Selected Tributaries, 2014 In 2014, Ohio EPA conducted a biological and water quality survey in the Wills Creek watershed. This fact sheet summarizes the findings detailed in the biological and water quality report (BWQR). Report Highlights Wills Creek mainstem has experienced impressive reestablishment of warmwater habitat (WWH) communities and improved habitat scores since Ohio EPA’s 1984 and 1994 water quality surveys. In 1994, Ohio EPA conducted a biological and water quality study of the Wills Creek mainstem at 17 locations. At that time, only one location near the mouth was in full attainment of the WWH aquatic life use. Of the 13 biological samples assessed in 2014, nine (69 Figure 1. Sampling locations in the Wills Creek survey largely percent) were fully meeting the WWH aquatic life use and met their existing or recommended aquatic life use four (31 percent) were in partial attainment. Only one mainstem location was meeting for fish in 1994 but in 2014, 10 of the 13 sites sampled met the WWH biocritieria. In the 2014 survey, only one location did not meet for the aquatic insects because of flow alteration from a lowhead dam. The other locations sampled for macroinvertebrates were marginally good to exceptional and showed a major improvement in the number of EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) and sensitive taxa compared to the 1984 and 1994 surveys. Habitat dramatically improved with an average QHEI score of 62.1. A total of 45 Wills Creek tributaries were sampled at 68 locations with 42 (62 percent) in full attainment, 21 (31 Stakeholder Input percent) in partial attainment and five (7 percent) in non- The Agency is releasing the results from Wills Creek attainment of the assigned aquatic life use.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843
    Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio 1654-1843 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org $4.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS Historical Background 03 Trails and Settlements 03 Shelters and Dwellings 04 Clothing and Dress 07 Arts and Crafts 08 Religions 09 Medicine 10 Agriculture, Hunting, and Fishing 11 The Fur Trade 12 Five Major Tribes of Ohio 13 Adapting Each Other’s Ways 16 Removal of the American Indian 18 Ohio Historical Society Indian Sites 20 Ohio Historical Marker Sites 20 Timeline 32 Glossary 36 The Ohio Historical Society 1982 Velma Avenue Columbus, OH 43211 2 Ohio Historical Society www.ohiohistory.org Historic American Indian Tribes of Ohio HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In Ohio, the last of the prehistoric Indians, the Erie and the Fort Ancient people, were destroyed or driven away by the Iroquois about 1655. Some ethnologists believe the Shawnee descended from the Fort Ancient people. The Shawnees were wanderers, who lived in many places in the south. They became associated closely with the Delaware in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Able fighters, the Shawnees stubbornly resisted white pressures until the Treaty of Greene Ville in 1795. At the time of the arrival of the European explorers on the shores of the North American continent, the American Indians were living in a network of highly developed cultures. Each group lived in similar housing, wore similar clothing, ate similar food, and enjoyed similar tribal life. In the geographical northeastern part of North America, the principal American Indian tribes were: Abittibi, Abenaki, Algonquin, Beothuk, Cayuga, Chippewa, Delaware, Eastern Cree, Erie, Forest Potawatomi, Huron, Iroquois, Illinois, Kickapoo, Mohicans, Maliseet, Massachusetts, Menominee, Miami, Micmac, Mississauga, Mohawk, Montagnais, Munsee, Muskekowug, Nanticoke, Narragansett, Naskapi, Neutral, Nipissing, Ojibwa, Oneida, Onondaga, Ottawa, Passamaquoddy, Penobscot, Peoria, Pequot, Piankashaw, Prairie Potawatomi, Sauk-Fox, Seneca, Susquehanna, Swamp-Cree, Tuscarora, Winnebago, and Wyandot.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthur Taggart Founder of the Catholic Community at Stockport
    Vol. XXXVI, No. 7 July, 2011 Arthur Taggart Founder of the Catholic Community at Stockport Arthur Taggart was an Irish Catholic immigrant, materials and they tried unsuccessfully to win the a road, dam, and canal contractor, and was the approval of payments in Congress in 1834 and inspiration for the early Catholic mission at 1836.4 But in 1836 the Ohio legislature passed an Stockport. He was born about 1802 near Drumquin act for Taggart’s relief, giving him $366.25 for quarry in western County Tyrone, Ireland, son of Patrick privileges and materials furnished by him on the Taggart. About 1820 he left Ireland with his sister, National Road.5 Mrs. Patrick McAleer, and her husband, and settled Late in 1832 Taggart was awarded a state at Little York, Pa. McAleer was a merchant and contract for procuring, quarrying, breaking, and hotel keeper.1 Another sister, Mrs. McDermott, delivering limestone from Canton to Zanesville for lived in the same vicinity in Pennsylvania. repairs to the National Road. Again he was not paid, From Little York, Taggart walked to Pittsburgh but in 1839 another act of the Ohio legislature allowed and then moved on to Wheeling. There he became him to sue the State.6 a contractor on the National Road. “The contracts On March 14, 1833 Arthur Taggart sold to the had been taken too low and the contractors generally Literary Society of St. Joseph inlot 32 on the National were not able to execute their contracts and Road in Norwich, for $1.00. A church was abandoned them without paying the laborers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District
    THE OHIO JOURNAL OF SCIENCE VOL. XXXVIII MAY, 1938 No. 3 THE MUSKINGUM WATERSHED CONSERVANCY DISTRICT CHARLES C. HUNTINGTON Department of Geography, The Ohio State University The Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District is an important example of co-operation for resources conservation by the Federal Government, a State, and the people of a local political subdivision. The Muskingum Watershed, a part of the Mississippi Drainage Basin, is the largest in Ohio, including 8,038 square miles. This area, together with the 289 square miles drained by Duck Creek, constitutes about one-fifth of the area of the state. Physiographically, it lies mostly in the unglaciated Appalachian Plateau, the northern and western part, however, being within the glaciated portion. (Plate I.) Politically, the Conservancy District consists of eighteen counties forming a political subdivision whose boundaries follow roughly those of the drainage basin. From an economic and social point of view, this Con- servancy District, created June 3, 1933, under the Conservancy Act of Ohio, passed soon after the great flood of 1913,1 includes approximately half the major land-use problem areas of the State.2 This very hilly section of Ohio was the first settled, but contains large areas not well adapted to arable farming on account of the difficulty of using modern farm machinery, the serious erosion due to the rapid run-off from long denuded slopes and the impoverished soils mostly of sandstone and shale origin. The average yearly rainfall of the area is approximately 39 inches, but the run-off is high especially during the winter and Massed February 6, 1914, Page's Annotated Ohio General Code, Sees.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA List of Special Waters April 2014
    ist of Ohio’s Special Waters, As of 4/16/2014 Water Body Name - SegmenL ting Description Hydrologic Unit Special Flows Into Drainage Basin Code(s) (HUC) Category* Alum Creek - headwaters to West Branch (RM 42.8) 05060001 Big Walnut Creek Scioto SHQW 150 Anderson Fork - Grog Run (RM 11.02) to the mouth 05090202 Caesar Creek Little Miami SHQW 040 Archers Fork Little Muskingum River Central Ohio SHQW 05030201 100 Tributaries Arney Run - Black Run (RM 1.64) to the mouth 05030204 040 Clear Creek Hocking SHQW Ashtabula River - confluence of East and West Fork (RM 27.54) Lake Erie Ashtabula SHQW, State to East 24th street bridge (RM 2.32) 04110003 050 Scenic river Auglaize River - Kelly Road (RM 77.32) to Jennings Creek (RM Maumee River Maumee SHQW 47.02) 04100007 020 Auglaize River – Jennings Creek (RM 47.02) to Ottawa River (RM Maumee River Maumee Species 33.26) Aukerman Creek Twin Creek Great Miami Species Aurora Branch - State Route 82 (RM 17.08) to the mouth Chagrin River Chagrin OSW-E, State 04110003 020 Scenic river Bantas Fork Twin Creek Great Miami OSW-E 05080002 040 Baughman Creek 04110004 010 Grand River Grand SHQW Beech Fork 05060002 Salt Creek Scioto SHQW 070 Bend Fork – Packsaddle run (RM 9.7) to the mouth 05030106 110 Captina Creek Central Ohio SHQW Tributaries Big Darby Creek Scioto River Scioto OSW-E 05060001 190, 05060001 200, 05060001 210, 05060001 220 Big Darby Creek – Champaign-Union county line to U.S. route Scioto River Scioto State Scenic 40 bridge, northern boundary of Battelle-Darby Creek metro river park to mouth Big Darby Creek – Champaign-Union county line to Conrail Scioto River Scioto National Wild railroad trestle (0.9 miles upstream of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Beneficial Use Support Document Little Muskingum River Basin
    Beneficial Use Support Document Little Muskingum River Basin Little Muskingum River and Hune Covered Bridge at Ohio 26 and Smith Rd. Division of Surface Water Ecological Assesment Section October 2016 Recommendations The streams in the Little Muskingum River watershed area currently listed in the Ohio Water Quality Standards (WQS) are assigned one or more of the following aquatic life use designations: Coldwater Habitat (CWH), Exceptional Warmwater Habitat (EWH), and Warmwater Habitat (WWH). Most aquatic life use designations of the streams in this survey have not been previously verified using biological data. This study used biological data to re-evaluate aquatic life uses for streams in the Little Muskingum River watershed. Forty-five streams in the Little Muskingum River watershed were evaluated for aquatic life and recreational use potential in 2015 (Table 2). Habitat metrics, as measured using the Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI), are provided in Table 3. Significant findings of this survey include the following: • The Exceptional Warmwater Habitat designation currently assigned to the Little Muskingum River mainstem was verified. • Nine streams previously designated as WWH are recommended to be re-designated as EWH. Sampling locations in Cranenest Fork, Wolfpen Run, Town Fork, Walnutcamp Run, Rias Run, Bear Run, Goss Fork, and Eightmile Creek, and Fifteenmile Creekfully attained the applicable EWH biocriteria, confirming the appropriateness of the higher aquatic life use designation. • Witten Fork downstream from the confluence with Millers Fork at River Mile (RM) 7.12 supported an exceptional fish and macroinvertebrate community. The fish and macroinvertebrate community upstream from the confluence with Millers Fork was indicative of a cold-water community, possessing multiple cold-water adapted fish and macroinvertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Muskingum River Watershed Management Plan: Meigs Creek Subwatershed
    Lower Muskingum River Watershed Management Plan: Meigs Creek Subwatershed Prepared by The Institute for Local Government Administration and Rural Development (ILGARD) At Ohio University Athens, Ohio January 2005 This publication was financed in part by a grant from the Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA under the provisions of Section 319 (h) of the Clean Water Act ACRONYM REFERENCE AEP-American Electric Power EWH-Exceptional Warmwater Habitat AMD-Acid Mine Drainage FEMA-Federal Emergency Management Agency AMDAT-Acid Mine Drainage Abatement and Treatment FLMR-Friends of the Lower Muskingum River AWS-Agricultural Water Supply FWPCA- Federal Water Pollution BMPs-Best Management Practices Control Administration BOD-Biological Oxygen Demand GIS-Geographical Information Systems BH-HVRDD-Buckeye Hills-Hocking HVCRC-Hocking Valley Community Valley Regional Development Residential Center District IBI-Index of Biological Integrity BHTC&D-Buckeye Hills Resource Conservation & Development ICI-Invertebrate Community Index Council ILGARD-Institute for Local Govern- CCC-Civilian Conservation Corps ment Administration & Rural Development COD-Chemical Oxygen Demand IWS-Industrial Water Supply CRC&D-Crossroads Resource Conservation & Development LRW-Limited Resource Water Council LTM-Long-term Monitoring CSO-Combined Sewer Overflow MRAB-Muskingum River Advisory CWH-Coldwater Habitat Board DBH-Diameter Breast Height MRM-Mineral Resources Management DO-Dissolved Oxygen MS-Master’s of Science ECEF- Ely Chapman Educational MWCD-Muskingum Watershed Foundation Conservancy
    [Show full text]