DOCSLIB.ORG

Water-Level Decline in the Apalachicola River, Florida, from 1954 to 2004, and Effects on Floodplain Habitats

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water-Level Decline in the Apalachicola River, Florida, from 1954 to 2004, and Effects on Floodplain Habitats Water-Level Decline in the Apalachicola River, Florida, from 1954 to 2004, and Effects on Floodplain Habitats By Helen M. Light1, Kirk R. Vincent2, Melanie R. Darst1, and Franklin D. Price3 1 U.S. Geological Survey, 2010 Levy Avenue, Tallahassee, Florida 32310. 2 U.S. Geological Survey, 3215 Marine , E-127, Boulder, Colorado 80303. 3 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 350 Carroll Street, Eastpoint, Florida 32328. Prepared in cooperation with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Northwest Florida Water Management District Florida Department of Environmental Protection U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5173 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Light, H.M., Vincent, K.R., Darst, M.R., and Price, F.D., 2006, Water-Level Decline in the Apalachicola River, Florida, from 1954 to 2004, and Effects on Floodplain Habitats: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5173, 83 p., plus CD. iii Contents Glossary ............................................................................................................................................................ vii Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 6 Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................. 6 Setting ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................. 8 Description of Basic Data ...................................................................................................................... 8 Stage-Discharge Relations at Streamgages ...................................................................................... 9 Selection of Pre-dam and Recent Periods ............................................................................10 Pre-Dam, Recent, and Period-of-Record Stage-Discharge Relations .............................13 Interpolated Stage-Discharge Relations Between Streamgages ............................................... 18 Water-Level Decline and Floodplain Effects .................................................................................... 22 Approximate Decrease in Duration of Inundation Caused by Channel Change .............22 Changes in Seasonal Distribution of Discharge ...................................................................26 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 29 Magnitude and Extent of Water-Level Decline ................................................................................ 29 Effects of Water-Level Decline on Floodplain Habitats .................................................................. 31 Specific Examples of Habitat Alteration ................................................................................33 Access to Cool-Water Refuges for Striped Bass ........................................................34 Persistence of Flowing-Water Habitat for Listed Mussels ........................................35 Duration of Inundation in Tupelo-Cypress Swamps....................................................38 Effects on Floodplain Habitats: An Overview ........................................................................39 Long-Term Changes in Monthly Discharge ..................................................................41 Future Trends and Potential for Restoration ................................................................45 Research Needs .................................................................................................................................... 47 Summary and Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 48 References....................................................................................................................................................... 49 Appendixes I. Stage-discharge relations at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida .................................................................................................54-59 II. Stage at the Blountstown streamgage in relation to discharge at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida ...................................60-63 III. Stage at the Wewahitchka streamgage in relation to discharge at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida ...................................64-67 IV. Stage at the RM 35 streamgage in relation to discharge at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida ................................................................68-71 V. Stage at the Sumatra streamgage in relation to discharge at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida ................................................................72-75 VI. Formulas defining stage-discharge relations developed from long-term streamgage data on the Apalachicola River, Florida ............................................................77 iv VII. Formulas used to interpolate stage between streamgages in relation to discharge at the Chattahoochee streamgage in the Apalachicola River, Florida .....................................................................................................................................78-79 VIII. Description of attached digital files of stage-discharge relations at all streamgages and between-gage sites on the Apalachicola River, Florida ......................80 IX. Water-level decline, at various discharges, that occurred at streamgages and within reaches along the nontidal Apalachicola River, Florida, as a result of long-term changes in stage-discharge relations from 1954 to 2004 ..............................81 X. Equivalent-stage discharges, corresponding percent exceedance values, and approximate decreases in percent duration of inundation, at various discharges, calculated at streamgages and within reaches along the nontidal Apalachicola River, Florida, as a result of long-term changes in stage-discharge relations from 1954 to 2004 ...................................................................82-83 Digital files of stage-discharge relations at streamgages and between-gage sites............................................................................................... CD (back pocket) Figures 1-2. Maps showing: 1. Drainage basin of the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama ......................................................................................................... 3 2. Major reaches of the Apalachicola River and location of long-term streamflow gaging stations ...................................................................................................................... 4 3. Diagram showing possible causes of long-term water-level decline in rivers and resulting impacts on river-floodplain habitats .......................................................................... 5 4-19. Graphs showing: 4. Water-surface profiles developed in 1956 and 1995 for the nontidal reach of the Apalachicola River, Florida, for a discharge of 9,300 cubic feet per second at Chattahoochee streamgage ............................................................................................... 9 5. Time series of stage during low-flow conditions in the Apalachicola River, Florida, showing time periods used to develop stage-discharge relations ............. 11 6. Stage at five streamgages on the Apalachicola River in relation to discharge at Chattahoochee, Florida, with known and estimated joining points for pre-dam and recent relations ........................................................................................... 14 7. Stage of joining points in relation to riverbank elevation and water surface at low flow in the Apalachicola River, Florida ............................................................... 15 8. Data used
Load more

Recommended publications
  • COMPARISON of PRE- and POST- MPOUNDMENT GROUND-WATER LEVELS NEAR the WOODRUFF LOCK and DAM SITE, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA Phillip N
    COMPARISON OF PRE- AND POST- MPOUNDMENT GROUND-WATER LEVELS NEAR THE WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM SITE, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA Phillip N. Albertson AUTHOR: Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, 3039 An-miler Road, Suite 130, Peachtree Business Center, Atlanta, GA 30360-2824. REFERENCE: Procet.dings of the 2001 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held March 26 - 27, 2001, at The University of Georgia, Kathryn J. Hatcher, editor, Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. Abstract. In 1999, the U.S. Geological Survey The effect of filling the reservoir on ground-water (USGS) and the Georgia Department of Natural levels also is indicated by long-term water-level data Resources, Environmental Protection Division, began a from a well near Lake Seminole in Florida. Sporadic, cooperative study to investigate the hydrology and long-term water-level measurements began at this well hydrogeology of the Lake Seminole area, southwestern in 1950 and have continued during filling of the Georgia, and northwestern Florida. Lake Seminole is a reservoir (1954-1957) until 1982. These data indicate 37,500-acre impoundment that was created in 1954 by that the water level in this well has risen more than 10 the construction of the Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam feet since the filling of the reservoir. Prior to filling, the just south of the confluence of the Chattahoochee and hydraulic gradient at this location sloped east and Flint Rivers (fig. 1). Recent negotiations between the northeast to the Chattahoochee River. Now it slopes in a States of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia over water- southerly direction near the western end of Jim allocation rights have brought attention to the need for a Woodruff Lock and Dam and to the Apalachicola River.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Survey of Alabama Biological
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist ECOSYSTEMS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE LITTLE CHOCTAWHATCHEE RIVER WATERSHED IN ALABAMA OPEN-FILE REPORT 1105 by Patrick E. O'Neil and Thomas E. Shepard Prepared in cooperation with the Choctawhatchee, Pea and Yellow Rivers Watershed Management Authority Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Introduction.......................................................... 1 Acknowledgments .................................................... 3 Study area .......................................................... 3 Methods ............................................................ 3 IBI sample collection ............................................. 3 Habitat measures................................................ 8 Habitat metrics ............................................ 9 IBI metrics and scoring criteria..................................... 12 Results and discussion................................................ 17 Sampling sites and collection results . 17 Relationships between habitat and biological condition . 28 Conclusions ........................................................ 31 References cited..................................................... 33 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Habitat evaluation form......................................... 10 Table 2. Fish community sampling sites in the Little Choctawhatchee River watershed ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Case 3:07-Md-00001-PAM-JRK Document 376 Filed 07/21/10 Page 1 of 26
    Case 3:07-md-00001-PAM-JRK Document 376 Filed 07/21/10 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA In re Tri-State Water Rights Litigation Case No. 3:07-md-01 (PAM/JRK) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In Phase 2 of this Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”), the Court must evaluate the actions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the “Corps”) in light of the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., and other similar statutes. Phase 1 of the litigation involved challenges to the Corps’s operations at the northernmost dam and reservoir in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (“ACF”) river basin. Phase 2 challenges those operations at the southernmost dam in the system, the Jim Woodruff Dam, which is located on the Apalachicola River at the border of Georgia and Florida. The parties in this Phase are: the states of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia; the Southeastern Federal Power Customers (“SeFPC”); the cities of Apalachicola, Florida, and Atlanta, Columbus, and Gainesville, Georgia; the Georgia counties of Gwinnett, DeKalb, and Fulton; the Atlanta Regional Commission (“ARC”); the Cobb County-Marietta Water Authority; the Board of Water Commissioners of Columbus, Georgia, doing business as the Columbus Water Works (“CWW”); the Lake Lanier Association;1 the Alabama Power 1 The Court will refer to Atlanta, Gainesville, Gwinnett County, DeKalb County, Fulton County, the ARC, the Cobb County-Marietta Water Authority, and the Lake Lanier Association collectively as “the Georgia parties.” The city of Columbus and the CWW Case 3:07-md-00001-PAM-JRK Document 376 Filed 07/21/10 Page 2 of 26 Company (“APC”); the Apalachicola Bay and River Keeper, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat Designation for the Fat Threeridge, Shinyrayed Pocketbook, Gulf Moccasinshell, Ochlockonee
    ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE FAT THREERIDGE, SHINYRAYED POCKETBOOK, GULF MOCCASINSHELL, OCHLOCKONEE MOCCASINSHELL, OVAL PIGTOE, CHIPOLA SLABSHELL, AND PURPLE BANKCLIMBER Draft Final Report | September 12, 2007 prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 N. Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203 prepared by: Industrial Economics, Incorporated 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02140 Draft – September 12, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-1T SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS 1-1 1.1 Purpose of the Economic Analysis 1-1 1.2 Background 1-2 1.3 Regulatory Alternatives 1-9 1.4 Threats to the Species and Habitat 1-9 1.5 Approach to Estimating Economic Effects 1-9 1.6 Scope of the Analysis 1-13 1.7 Analytic Time Frame 1-16 1.8 Information Sources 1-17 1.9 Structure of Report 1-18 SECTION 2 POTENTIAL CHANGES IN WATER USE AND MANAGEMENT FOR CONSERVATION OF THE SEVEN MUSSELS 2-1 2.1 Summary of Methods for Estimation of Economic Impacts Associated with Flow- Related Conservation Measures 2-2 2.2 Water Use in Proposed Critical Habitat Areas 2-3 2.3 Potential Changes in Water Use in the Flint River Basin 2-5 2.4 Potential Changes in Water Management in the Apalachicola River Complex (Unit 8) 2-10 2.5 Potential Changes in Water Management in the Santa Fe River Complex (Unit 11) 2-22 SECTION 3 POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS RELATED TO CHANGES IN WATER USE AND MANAGEMENT 3-1 3.1 Summary 3-6 3.2 Potential Economic Impacts Related to Agricultural Water Uses 3-7 3.3 Potential Economic Impacts Related
    [Show full text]
  • DIRECT TESTIMONY of PHILIP B. BEDIENT, Ph.D., P.E
    No. 142, Original In The Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF GEORGIA, Defendant. DIRECT TESTIMONY OF PHILIP B. BEDIENT, Ph.D., P.E. October 26, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF OPINIONS .......................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS .................................................. 6 ANY CHANGE IN THE AMOUNT OR TIMING OF STATE-LINE FLOW MUST BE COORDINATED AND EXECUTED BY THE CORPS ............................................................... 7 I. The Corps Operates the Federal Reservoir Projects in the ACF Basin as a Single, Integrated System to Balance Multiple Project Purposes ................................................... 9 II. The RIOP Controls Basin-Wide Storage and Releases of Water in the Federal Reservoirs ......................................................................................................................... 17 III. The Corps Operates Its Reservoir System as a Single Unit, and Under Low-Flow Conditions Offsets Increased Flint River Flows by Decreasing Chattahoochee River Releases ................................................................................................................... 25 IV. Increases in Basin Inflow Would Not Increase State-Line Flows into Florida During Low-Flow Conditions or Drought Operations...................................................... 26 REDUCTIONS IN GEORGIA’S WATER USE WOULD NOT RESULT IN INCREASED STATE-LINE FLOWS
    [Show full text]
  • Gulf Sturgeon Spawning Migration and Habitat in the Choctawhatchee River System, Alabama±Florida
    Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 129:811±826, 2000 q Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2000 Gulf Sturgeon Spawning Migration and Habitat in the Choctawhatchee River System, Alabama±Florida DEWAYNE A. FOX North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Zoology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27695-7617, USA JOSEPH E. HIGHTOWER* North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Department of Zoology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27695-7617, USA FRANK M. PARAUKA U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Field Of®ce, 1612 June Avenue, Panama City, Florida 32405, USA Abstract.ÐInformation about spawning migration and spawning habitat is essential to maintain and ultimately restore populations of endangered and threatened species of anadromous ®sh. We used ultrasonic and radiotelemetry to monitor the movements of 35 adult Gulf sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi (a subspecies of the Atlantic sturgeon A. oxyrinchus) as they moved between Choctawhatchee Bay and the Choctawhatchee River system during the spring of 1996 and 1997. Histological analysis of gonadal biopsies was used to determine the sex and reproductive status of individuals. Telemetry results and egg sampling were used to identify Gulf sturgeon spawning sites and to examine the roles that sex and reproductive status play in migratory behavior. Fertilized Gulf sturgeon eggs were collected in six locations in both the upper Choctawhatchee and Pea rivers. Hard bottom substrate, steep banks, and relatively high ¯ows characterized collection sites. Ripe Gulf sturgeon occupied these spawning areas from late March through early May, which included the interval when Gulf sturgeon eggs were collected.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulated Effects of Impoundment of Lake Seminole on Ground-Water Flow in the Upper Floridan Aquifer in Southwestern Georgia and Adjacent Parts of Alabama and Florida
    Simulated Effects of Impoundment of Lake Seminole on Ground-Water Flow in the Upper Floridan Aquifer in Southwestern Georgia and Adjacent Parts of Alabama and Florida Prepared in cooperation with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Georgia Geologic Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5077 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Northern view of Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam from the west bank of the Apalachicola River. Photo by Dianna M. Crilley, U.S. Geological Survey. A. Map showing simulated flow net of the Upper Floridan aquifer in the lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin under hypothetical preimpoundment Lake Seminole conditions. B. Map showing simulated flow net of the Upper Floridan aquifer in the lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin under postimpoundment Lake Seminole conditions. Simulated Effects of Impoundment of Lake Seminole on Ground-Water Flow in the Upper Floridan Aquifer in Southwestern Georgia and Adjacent Parts of Alabama and Florida By L. Elliott Jones and Lynn J. Torak Prepared in cooperation with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Georgia Geologic Survey Atlanta, Georgia Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5077 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004 This report is available on the World Wide Web at http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/pubs/ For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Choctawhatchee Bay
    Choctawhatchee Bay By Barbara Ruth1 and Lawrence R. Handley 2 Background channel opened in 1929 to provide a permanent pass through a previously intermittent opening. The bay also opens to The Choctawhatchee River and Bay system historically the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in the east and to has supported a rich and diverse ecology that provides Santa Rosa Sound and the GIWW in the west. (The GIWW is substantial economic and quality-of-life benefits to residents regularly maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) of northwest Florida (Northwest Florida Water Management Pensacola Pass is separated from the west side of the bay by District, 1996). The Choctawhatchee Bay area has become an 84-km (52-mi) portion of the GIWW that was dredged a highly desired area for relocation for many people: the initially in the 1940s (Northwest Florida Water Management perceived overdevelopment in southern Florida has led many District, 1996). Choctawhatchee Bay is a stratified system to look for less highly developed areas. Although the area has with low tidal energy, limited flushing (Blaylock, 1983; no major industry, urban and suburban development, along Livingston, 1986), and a halocline (noticeable changes in with businesses that support Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) salt concentrations between the surface waters and lower activities and an extensive retirement community, is creating waters) (Blaylock, 1983; Livingston, 1986). The bay’s main freshwater influence is the Choctawhatchee River, which impacts on the ecosystem through additional stormwater 3 3 runoff, resource utilization, and similar pressures that are has a rate of 243 m /s (8,580 ft /s) (Northwest Florida Water caused by development.
    [Show full text]
  • Choctawhatchee River & Bay SWIM Plan
    Choctawhatchee River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan November 2017 Program Development Series 17-05 NORTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD George Roberts Jerry Pate John Alter Chair, Panama City Vice Chair, Pensacola Secretary-Treasurer, Malone Gus Andrews Jon Costello Marc Dunbar DeFuniak Springs Tallahassee Tallahassee Ted Everett Nick Patronis Bo Spring Chipley Panama City Beach Port St. Joe Brett J. Cyphers Executive Director Headquarters 81 Water Management Drive Havana, Florida 32333-4712 (850) 539-5999 Crestview Econfina Milton 180 E. Redstone Avenue 6418 E. Highway 20 5453 Davisson Road Crestview, Florida 32539 Youngstown, FL 32466 Milton, FL 32583 (850) 683-5044 (850) 722-9919 (850) 626-3101 Choctawhatchee River and Bay SWIM Plan Northwest Florida Water Management District Acknowledgements This document was developed by the Northwest Florida Water Management District under the auspices of the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program and in accordance with sections 373.451-459, Florida Statutes. The plan update was prepared under the supervision and oversight of Brett Cyphers, Executive Director and Carlos Herd, Director, Division of Resource Management. Funding support was provided by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund. The assistance and support of the NFWF is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would like to especially recognize members of the public, as well as agency reviewers and staff from the District and from the Ecology and Environment, Inc., team that contributed to the development of this plan. Among those that contributed considerable time and effort to assist in the development of this plan are the following.
    [Show full text]
  • Designation of Critical Habitat for the Gulf Sturgeon; Proposed Rule
    Thursday, June 6, 2002 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 17 and 226 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Gulf Sturgeon; Proposed Rule VerDate May<23>2002 18:28 Jun 05, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06JNP2.SGM pfrm12 PsN: 06JNP2 39106 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 109 / Thursday, June 6, 2002 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the public on all aspects of this Executive Center Drive North, St. proposal, including data on the Petersburg, FL 33702–2449, (telephone Fish and Wildlife Service economic and other impacts of the 727/570–5312; facsimile 727/570–5517) designation. with questions concerning units 8 to 14. 50 CFR Part 17 DATES: Comments: We will accept SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RIN 1018–AI23 comments until September 23, 2002. Background Public Hearings: We have scheduled DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE four public hearings for this proposal. The Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser We will hold public informational oxyrinchus (=oxyrhynchus) desotoi), National Oceanic and Atmospheric meetings prior to each public hearing at also known as the Gulf of Mexico Administration the hearing location. The public sturgeon, is an anadromous fish information sessions will start at 5:00 (ascending rivers from the sea for 50 CFR Part 226 p.m. and end at 6:30 p.m.. The formal breeding), inhabiting coastal rivers from public hearings will start at 7:00 p.m. Louisiana to Florida during the warmer [Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods in Florida Magnitude and Frequency
    UNITED STATES EPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR- ., / GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FLOODS IN FLORIDA MAGNITUDE AND FREQUENCY By R.W. Pride Prepared in cooperation with Florida State Road Department Open-file report 1958 MAR 2 CONTENTS Page Introduction. ........................................... 1 Acknowledgements ....................................... 1 Description of the area ..................................... 1 Topography ......................................... 2 Coastal Lowlands ..................................... 2 Central Highlands ..................................... 2 Tallahassee Hills ..................................... 2 Marianna Lowlands .................................... 2 Western Highlands. .................................... 3 Drainage basins ....................................... 3 St. Marys River. ......_.............................. 3 St. Johns River ...................................... 3 Lake Okeechobee and the everglades. ............................ 3 Peace River ....................................... 3 Withlacoochee River. ................................... 3 Suwannee River ...................................... 3 Ochlockonee River. .................................... 5 Apalachicola River .................................... 5 Choctawhatchee, Yellow, Blackwater, Escambia, and Perdido Rivers. ............. 5 Climate. .......................................... 5 Flood records ......................................... 6 Method of flood-frequency analysis ................................. 9 Flood frequency at a gaging
    [Show full text]
  • Chattahoochee & Chipola Rivers Basin Management
    CHATTAHOOCHEE & CHIPOLA RIVERS BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN Alabama Clean Water Partnership Montgomery, Alabama DECEMBER 2006 Prepared by: Photo: Wayne Clark Courtesy of the Valley Times News CHATTAHOOCHEE & CHIPOLA RIVERS BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN Alabama Clean Water Partnership Montgomery, Alabama DECEMBER 2006 Prepared by: This project was funded or partially funded by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management through a Clean Water Act Section 319 (h) nonpoint source grant provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Region IV CHATTAHOOCHEE & CHIPOLA RIVERS BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................... ix COMMONLY USED ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS................................................... x PREFACE .................................................................................................................................... xiv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background.......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 Basin Plan Development Process......................................................................... 1-9 1.3 Geographic Scope of the Basin Management Plan............................................ 1-10 1.3.1 Stakeholder Involvement ....................................................................... 1-10 1.3.2 Assessment
    [Show full text]