DOCSLIB.ORG

Water Quality Monitoring Program Report 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water Quality Monitoring Program Report 2006 Water Quality Monitoring Program Report 2006 Clay Houston Water Quality Monitoring Program Director Windham County Natural Resources Conservation District January 2007 1 2 Acknowledgments The West River Watershed Alliance (WRWA) and its partners, the Windham County Natural Resources Conservation District (WCNRCD) and Windham Regional Commission (WRC) would like to thank the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation and the LaRosa Laboratory, the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Conservation License Plate Grant Program, the Vermont Environmental Board, and the Exit 6 Shell station manager and employees for their support of the 2006 WRWA Water Quality Monitoring Program. We would also like to thank the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for their cooperative reporting effort for the Townshend Recreational Area and the Winhall Campground, as well as the Green Mountain RSVP Center for working with us and providing valuable volunteers for the program. The WRWA Water Quality Monitoring Program would not have been possible without the conscientious dedication of our Volunteer Field Assistant, Stacy Birch, and our WRWA volunteers who braved challenging conditions and early mornings to collect their samples during all phases of this program. We are forever grateful to our dedicated and determined volunteers and their families, both new and old who make this program possible: Fred Bacon and Laura Wallingford-Bacon Michael Marantz Lynne Beehler Simon Norton CB Beehler Frederick Noyes Stacy Birch Darlene and Ernie Palola Jeff Burkert David Plant Marie Levesque Caduto Em Richards Laurie Callahan John and Targ Spicer Bill Callahan Cory Stark and family David Charis-Mink Tom and Sally Topitzer Patty Famolare and family Bill and Betsey Uptegrove Fred and Lorna Hard Kathy Urffer Andrew Harper David Williams David Malko The staff at Rockingham Mobile 3 4 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...........................................................................................................................................3 ACRONYM LIST: ......................................................................................................................................................6 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................7 1.1 RATIONALE..........................................................................................................................................................7 1.2 SUMMARY OF THE PROGRAM...............................................................................................................................7 1.3 FUNDING..............................................................................................................................................................8 1.4 LOCATION OF MONITORING PROGRAM ................................................................................................................8 2.0 METHODS.............................................................................................................................................................9 2.1 WRWA QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA/QC) ....................................................................9 2.2 VOLUNTEER RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING.........................................................................................................9 2.3 THE THREE-PHASED MONITORING PLAN.............................................................................................................9 2.3.1 Phase 1........................................................................................................................................................9 2.3.2 Phase 2......................................................................................................................................................12 2.3.3 Phase 3......................................................................................................................................................13 3.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ................................................................................................................................13 3.1 E.COLI (ESCHERICHIA COLI)................................................................................................................................16 3.2 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (TP)..................................................................................................................................17 3.3 NITRATE/NITRITE (NOX)....................................................................................................................................18 3.4 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS (TSS) .....................................................................................................................19 3.5 TURBIDITY.........................................................................................................................................................20 3.6 WATER TEMPERATURE ......................................................................................................................................20 3.7 PH......................................................................................................................................................................22 3.8 CONDUCTIVITY ..................................................................................................................................................23 4.0. DATA MANAGEMENT....................................................................................................................................23 4.1 DATA REPORTING/PROGRAM ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................23 4.2 ADVANTAGES OF WRWA MONITORING PROGRAM...........................................................................................24 5. 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................24 5.1 CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................................................................................24 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................................................25 6.0 COOPERATING ORGANIZATIONS..............................................................................................................25 APPENDIX A.............................................................................................................................................................27 WRWA PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 SAMPLING RESULTS GRAPHS AND TABLES ............................................................27 West River Phase 1 Sampling Results 2006 .......................................................................................................45 Williams River Phase 1 Sampling Results 2006.................................................................................................49 Saxtons River Phase 1 Sampling Results 2006 ..................................................................................................51 General Water Quality Phase 2 Sampling Results 2006 – All Watersheds........................................................53 5 Acronym List: BUHS - Brattleboro Union High School E.coli - Escherichia coli EPA - Environmental Protection Agency GIS - Geographic Information System NOx - Nitrates QA/QC - Quality Control/Quality Assurance QAPP - Quality Assurance Project Plan SAC - Stream Action Committee (WRWA) TNC - The Nature Conservancy of Vermont TP - Total Phosphorous TSS - Total Suspended Solids USDA - United States Department of Agriculture USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service VT DEC - Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation WCNRCD - Windham County Natural Resources Conservation District WRC - Windham Regional Commission WRWA - West River Watershed Alliance 6 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Rationale The West River Watershed Alliance (WRWA), a non-profit organization formed in 2001, recognized the importance of water quality monitoring on the West River. Since 2003 they have created and overseen a volunteer based program to perform long term water quality monitoring in the watersheds of the West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers, that form Basin 11. The data from this program has been incorporated into the Basin 11 Management Plan. The Basin 11 Management Plan is part of the rationale for the pursuance of long term water quality monitoring in the watersheds within Basin 11, and the data collected by the volunteer monitoring program plays an integral part of the Plan’s implementation. Data gathered by the WRWA volunteer monitors is currently being used by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC) Watershed Coordinator to designate Water Management Types to many of the rivers and streams in all three watersheds of Basin 11. The Water Quality Monitoring Program monitors a number of streams that the State does not have data on so the results reported to WRWA are the only source of information for those streams. The program also monitors many more sites, on a more regular schedule, than the State is able to. The data gathered serves to fill in a number of gaps in the VTDEC information database and allows Water Management Type recommendations to be made on quality data as well as observations. The volunteers have also brought
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Response Summary for Comments Received on the Vermont 2010 Draft Versions of The
    Response summary for comments received on the Vermont 2010 Draft versions of the: 303(d) List of Impaired Waters (Part A) List of Priority Waters (Parts B-G) Attachment A: Part B justification for Big Spruce Brook Attachment B: 1272 Order issued to Stowe Mountain Resort Draft Lists Comment Period A public comment period was established upon the release of the draft 2010 303(d) List of Impaired Waters and the 2010 List of Priority Waters (the Lists) from March 11, 2010 through April 9, 2010. In conjunction with the release of the draft Lists, an informational public meeting was conducted in Waterbury on March 24, 2010 to present the Lists and to answer any questions. At the close of the public comment period, VTDEC had received comments from the following seven parties: Commenter: Submitted by: Identification: City of Rutland Same Rutland Stowe Mountain Resort VHB/Pioneer Stowe Windham Regional Commission, Natural Same WRC Resources Committee Stratton Area Citizen’s Committee Same SACC USEPA Region 1 Same USEPA1 Bromley Mountain Ski Resort VHB/Pioneer Bromley Summit Ventures NE, LLC (Sugarbush Resort) VHB/Pioneer Sugarbush Some comments have been edited or paraphrased for greater clarity and brevity, but every effort was made to preserve the original meaning and context. Comments are grouped according to pertinent sections of the lists. Part A and Interim List Comments 1. Comment: We are concerned that sediment has been removed as a pollutant from the West River below Ball Mt Dam to Townshend Dam -10miles (VT11-10). It appears that the sediment that was released from Ball Mt Lake into the West River below the Ball Mt Dam over 10 years ago has been washed away enough to create an equilibrium in the flow of sediment.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered Usace Sites
    HYDROPOWER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT AT NON-POWERED USACE SITES Prepared by the Hydropower Analysis Center for USACE Headquarters July 2013 Final Report Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered USACE Sites EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the largest owner-operator of hydropower plants in the United States, with 75 plants and an installed capability of 21,000 megawatts (MW), or about 24% of the total hydroelectric capacity. This report describes a national hydropower resource assessment study that assessed the potential and economic feasibility of adding hydroelectric power to these non- powered USACE projects over a 50-year period of analysis. Site Selection In selecting non-powered USACE projects with hydropower potential, the study employed a 2012 report by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) that identified the hydropower potential of 54,000 non- powered dams in the United States. Among these dams, 419 were USACE non-powered dams. This number was reduced to 223 sites using the following screening, as shown on the table below. • Generate 1 MW or more of potential hydropower. • No current Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license. • No obvious hindrances in developing hydropower. Distribution of USACE Sites with Potential Hydropower Capability FERC Preliminary or No FERC Permits Total Projects Pending Preliminary Permit Division Identified Total Percentage Total Percent Number of Total Number of Total Great Lakes & Ohio River (LRD) 71 40 56% 31 44% Mississippi Valley (MVD) 50 28 56% 22 44% Southwestern (SWD) 39 7 18% 32 82% North Atlantic (NAD) 21 2 10% 19 90% South Atlantic (SAD) 19 8 42% 11 58% Northwestern (NWD) 12 5 42% 7 58% South Pacific (SPD) 11 2 18% 9 82% USACE Total 223 92 41% 131 59% Data Collection To improve the study data, the daily hydraulic head and flow values for all 223 sites were obtained.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shopper 05-02-18
    56 FREE Years We’ve Acquired the Message Treat your ECRWSS PRSRT STD US Postage Mom for PAID Permit #2 North Haverhill, NH See Page 3B POSTAL CUSTOMER Our Contact Information is on Page 6A Independently Owned & Locally Operated MAY 02, 2018 | WWW.VERMONTJOURNAL.COM VOLUME 56, ISSUE 49 Apple Blossom Cotillion See Pages 8A - 10A KMA Publications Inc. Construction on Woolson acquires The Message of the Block building expected to Week start in the fall REGION – Robert Miller of 1970s. “I feel like The Message BY PATRICK ADRIAN include the Springfield Housing Au- “This is a complicated project,” KMA Publications Inc., owner and is home again, back to where it The Shopper thority, Springfield Regional Devel- Morelock told the Select Board. publisher of The Vermont Journal VermontTHE started,” he said. Miller recalled opment Corporation, Springfield on “We’ve been lucky to get partners and The Shopper, announced Fri- feeling the same way when he SPRINGFIELD, Vt. – The Wool- the Move, and several social services in this particular project. If it wasn’t day, April 27, 2018 that he has pur- purchased The Shopper back in son Block building renovation organizations. for [them] we wouldn’t be doing this chased The Message of the Week. 2009, acquiring another paper has come with hurdles, including The amendment, which the Se- project. Nobody would be doing this The sale will merge the newspa- Journal his parents had started years al- revenue shortfalls and added con- lect Board unanimously approved, project.” pers but continue to be published most 57 years ago. “I grew up in struction costs, but despite chal- changes the original loan terms from Needed architectural revisions only under The Vermont Journal & the newspaper business work- lenges developers say they expect repayment over 20 years with a one have resulted in $200,000 additional and The Shopper banners.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Deal Versus Yankee Independence: the Failure of Comprehensive Development on the Connecticut River, and Its Long-Term Consequences
    The New Deal versus Yankee independence: The failure of comprehensive development on the Connecticut River, and its long-term consequences Eve Vogel1 Department of Geosciences, UMass Amherst With assistance from Alexandra Lacy 2011 alumna (BS, Environmental Sciences), UMass Amherst Adapted from: Vogel, Eve and Alexandra Lacy. Forthcoming. The New Deal versus Yankee independence: The failure of comprehensive development on the Connecticut River, and its long-term consequences. The Northeastern Geographer 4 (2) Introduction For a person familiar with federal dams on major rivers in the American West or South, a visit to an Army Corps of Engineers dam in New England’s largest river basin, the Connecticut, can be a startling experience. Instead of an extended reservoir, one looks down from the empty heights and on both sides sees only a small river far below. Nor is there the fanfare – the visitors center, the historical information, the celebratory propaganda. Simply finding one of the Connecticut River’s federal dams can take some effort. None are on the mainstem. One must drive through the bucolic New England byways and forested hills to find a dam on a tributary (See Figure 1). For New Englanders, the near-invisibility of federal dams may not seem surprising. New England’s history and identity, including the Connecticut Valley’s, seem to rest with the small- to medium-scale development of rivers with mill dams during the 17th thru 19th centuries (e.g. Delaney 1983; Steinberg 1991). It might be more startling for many to learn that during the mid- twentieth century, the federal government did build a series of very large dams in the Connecticut Basin, which have had profound effect on the river.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study Report
    Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study STUDY REPORT A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation Katie Kennedy, The Nature Conservancy Kim Lutz, The Nature Conservancy Christopher Hatfield, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Leanna Martin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Townsend Barker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Richard Palmer, University of Massachusetts Amherst Luke Detwiler, University of Massachusetts Amherst Jocelyn Anleitner, University of Massachusetts Amherst John Hickey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kennedy, K., K. Lutz, C. Hatfield, L. Martin, T. Barker, R. Palmer, L. Detwiler, J. Anleitner, J. Hickey. 2018. The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study: A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation. The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and University of Massachusetts Amherst. Northampton, MA. Available: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed For a quick, easy-to-read overview of the Connecticut River Watershed Study, see our companion “Study Overview” document, available at: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed June 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • The Print & Fold Passport
    THIS PROGRAM IS PRODUCED WITH SUPPORT FROM: 2021 SUMMER WINDHAM COUNTY PASSPORT BRATTLEBORO, BROOKLINE, GUILFORD, NEWFANE, TOWNSHEND AND VERNON PRESENTED BY: SNAP-ED Funding for this program is provided from the USDA. The USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. Come Alive Outside is a 501c3 nonprofit that works to create the awareness, intention and opportunity for people to live healthier lives outside. THIS PASSPORT BELONGS TO: PRIZES Parents! Complete the Come Alive Outside Passport survey by SEPTEMBER 20TH 2021, to have NAME your child be entered into the grand prize drawing! Visit: https://risevt. org/passport-survey/ or scan the QR code. You can also get a printed survey from the SCHOOL WSESU garden work hours, local libraries or the WRMSD Summer enrichment program. GRAND PRIZES: GRADE 1 Sam’s Sport and 2 Outfitters $100 Gift Card Family Hydro Flask Package Bundle 3 from Moore Free Library WHAT DO I LIKE ABOUT SUMMER? 35 TABLE OF CONTENTS About Come Alive Outside and RiseVT ................................................................4 EXPLORE YOUR How it works..............................................................................................................5 Stay Safe .....................................................................................................................6 LOCAL LIBRARIES MAKE YOUR OWN ADVENTURES 7-15 Take a Moonlight Walk ............................................................................................8 Bug Hunt ....................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX a Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Definition Of...27, 44 Acre
    INDEX 293 A Blackwater River near Webster, NH . 275, 285 Acid neutralizing capacity, definition of. 27, 44 Blue-green algae, definition of . 28 Acre-foot, definition of . 27 Bottom material, definition of . 28 Adenosine triphosphate, definition of . 27 Brandy Brook at Bread Loaf, VT . 279 Adjusted discharge, definition of . 27 Bread Loaf, VT, Brandy Brook at . 279 Albany, NH, ground-water levels in . 238-239 Brentwood, NH, Exeter River at Haigh Road near . 72-73 Algae, Brighton, VT, ground-water levels in. 265 Blue-green, definition of . 28 Bristol, NH, Smith River near . 86-87 Fire, definition of . 32 Bristol, VT, Little Otter Creek Tributary near . 279 Green, definition of . 32 Brownington Branch near Evansville, VT . 281 Algal growth potential, definition of . 27 Brunswick Springs, VT, Paul Stream Tributary near . 276 Alkalinity, definition of . 27 Bryant Brook at Waterbury Center, VT . 280 Ammonoosuc River at Bethlehem Junction, NH . 132-133 Bulk electrical conductivity, definition of . 28 Androscoggin River, Burlington, VT, at Errol, NH . 50 Englesby Brook at . 195-196 near Gorham, NH. 52 Lake Champlain at. 229-230 Annual runoff, definition of . 27 Potash Brook at . 193-194 Annual 7-day minimum, definition of. 27 C Aquifer Campton, NH, ground-water levels in . 246 Confined, definition of. 29 Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum 1928, definition of . 28 Unconfined, definition of. 43 Cell volume, definition of. 28 Water-table, definition of. 43 Cells/volume, definition of . 29 Aroclor, definition of. 27 Center Rutland, VT, Otter Creek at . 181-182 Artificial substrate, definition of . 27 Cfs-day, definition of . 29 Ash mass, definition of .
    [Show full text]
  • 122 Fish Management Rule Annotated
    APPENDIX 122 TITLE 10 Conservation and Development APPENDIX CHAPTER 2. FISH Subchapter 2. Seasons, Waters, and Limits § 122. Fish Management Regulation. 1.0 Authority (a) This rule is adopted pursuant to 10 V.S.A. §4081(b). In adopting this rule, the Fish and Wildlife Board is following the policy established by the General Assembly that the protection, propagation, control, management, and conservation of fish, wildlife and fur-bearing animals in this state is in the interest of the public welfare and that the safeguarding of this valuable resource for the people of the state requires a constant and continual vigilance. (b) In accordance with 10 V.S.A. §4082, this rule is designed to maintain the best health, population and utilization levels of Vermont’s fisheries. (c) In accordance with 10 V.S.A. §4083, this rule establishes open seasons; establishes daily, season, possession limits and size limits; prescribes the manner and means of taking fish; and prescribes the manner of transportation and exportation of fish. 2.0 Purpose It is the policy of the state that the protection, propagation control, management and conservation of fish, wildlife, and fur-bearing animals in this state is in the interest of the public welfare, and that safeguarding of this valuable resource for the people of the state requires a constant and continual vigilance. 3.0 Open-Water Fishing, legal methods of taking fish 3.1 Definitions (a) Department – Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. (b) Commissioner –Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioner. (c) Open-water fishing –Fishing by means of hook and line in hand or attached to a rod or other device in open water.
    [Show full text]
  • Tactical Basin Plan West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and Adjacent
    Tactical Basin Plan for the West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and adjacent Connecticut River Tributaries Salmon, Canoe, Sacketts, East Putney, Chase, Fullam, Mill, and Morse Brooks (Basin 11/13) DRAFT Prepared by: Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Department of Environmental Conservation Watershed Management Division October 2015 Basin 12 – 13 Tactical Basin Plan for the Deerfield River and Southern Connecticut River Tributaries in Vermont This Water Quality Management Plan was prepared in accordance with 10 VSA § 1253(d), the Vermont Water Quality Standards, the Federal Clean Water Act and 40 CFR 130.6, and the Vermont Surface Water Management Strategy. Approved1: David Mears, Commissioner Date Deb Markowitz, Secretary Date The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources is an equal opportunity agency and offers all persons the benefits of participating in each of its programs and competing in all areas of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual preference, or other non-merit factors. This document is available upon request in large print, braille or audiocassette. VT Relay Service for the Hearing Impaired 1-800-253-0191 TDD>Voice - 1-800-253-0195 Voice>TDD Cover Photo: Twin Falls, Saxtons River 1) Pursuant to Section 1-02 D (5) of the VWQS, Basin Plans shall propose the appropriate Water Management Type of Types for Class B waters based on the exiting water quality and reasonably attainable and desired water quality management goals. ANR has not included proposed Water Management Types in this Basin Plan. ANR is in the process of developing an anti-degradation rule in accordance with 10 VSA 1251a (c) and is re-evaluating whether Water Management Typing is the most effective and efficient method of ensuring that quality of Vermont's waters are maintained and enhanced as required by the VWQS, including the anti-degradation policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices for the West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and Adjacent Connecticut River Tributaries
    Appendices for the West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and adjacent Connecticut River Tributaries Contents Appendices for the West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and adjacent Connecticut River Tributaries ....................................... 1 Appendix A – Existing Uses ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Appendix B. 1 – Dams in the Basin ............................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Appendix B. 2 – Coordination Plan ......................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Appendix B – 3. How a Dam Affects a River ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 Appendix B – 4. Whitewater Paddling Releases on the West River ........................................................................................................................ 20 Appendix B – 5. VDFW Whitewater Release Memo ................................................................................................................................................ 22 Appendix C – Fisheries Assessment Summary ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating Tradeoffs Between Flood Control and Ecological Flow Benefits in the Connecticut River Basin Jocelyn Anleitner
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Civil and Environmental Engineering Masters Projects 5-2014 Investigating Tradeoffs Between Flood Control And Ecological Flow Benefits in the Connecticut River Basin Jocelyn Anleitner Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cee_ewre Part of the Environmental Engineering Commons Anleitner, Jocelyn, "Investigating Tradeoffs Between Flood Control And Ecological Flow Benefits in the onneC cticut River Basin" (2014). Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Masters Projects. 64. https://doi.org/10.7275/8vfa-s912 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Civil and Environmental Engineering at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INVESTIGATING TRADEOFFS BETWEEN FLOOD CONTROL AND ECOLOGICAL FLOW BENEFITS IN THE CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN A Master’s Project Presented By: Jocelyn Anleitner Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Engineering April 2014 INVESTIGATING TRADEOFFS BETWEEN FLOOD CONTROL AND ECOLOGICAL FLOW BENEFITS IN THE CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN A Master's Project Presented by JOCELYN ANLEITNER Approved as to style and content by: ~~tor Civil and Environmental Engineering Department ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for funding this work through the Connecticut River Project. This work would not have been possible without, not only their funding, but the support and expertise they have provided.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL REPORT 7 Hazen Drive, PO Box 483 Concord, NH 03302-0483 14
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Gov. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-NH-RD-14282F Accession No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Estimation of Flood Discharges at Selected Recurrence Intervals for Streams in New 2008 Hampshire 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Scott A. Olson 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) U. S. Geological Survey New Hampshire-Vermont Water Science Center 361 Commerce Way Pembroke, NH 03275 11. Contract or Grant No. 14282F, X-A000 (601) 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered New Hampshire Department of Transportation FINAL REPORT 7 Hazen Drive, PO Box 483 Concord, NH 03302-0483 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes In cooperation with the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration 16. Abstract This report provides estimates of flood discharges at selected recurrence intervals for streamgages in and adjacent to New Hampshire and equations for estimating flood discharges at recurrence intervals of 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-years for ungaged, unregulated, rural streams in New Hampshire. The equations were developed using generalized least-squares regression. Flood-frequency and drainage-basin characteristics from 117 streamgages were used in developing the equations. The drainage-basin characteristics used as explanatory variables in the regression equations include drainage area, mean April precipitation, percentage of wetland area, and main channel slope. The average standard error of prediction for estimating the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year recurrence interval flood discharges with these equations are 30.0, 30.8, 32.0, 34.2, 36.0, 38.1, and 43.4 percent, respectively.
    [Show full text]