DOCSLIB.ORG

Peak-Flow Characteristics of Virginia Streams

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Peak-Flow Characteristics of Virginia Streams Prepared in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Transportation Peak-Flow Characteristics of Virginia Streams Culpeper Basin WASHINGTON, D.C. MARYLAND WEST VIRGINIA Chesapeake Bay KENTUCKY ATLANTIC OCEAN TENNESSEE NORTH CAROLINA Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5144 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover art. See figure 1 (map showing peak-flow study sites in Virginia). Peak-Flow Characteristics of Virginia Streams By Samuel H. Austin, Jennifer L. Krstolic, and Ute Wiegand Prepared in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Transportation Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5144 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: 2011 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. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov 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: Austin, S.H., Krstolic, J.L., and Wiegand, Ute, 2011, Peak-flow characteristics of Virginia streams: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5144, 106 p. + 3 tables and 2 appendixes on CD. (Also available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5144/.) ISBN 978 1 4113 3288 1 iii Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1 Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................1 Background............................................................................................................................................1 Physical Setting.....................................................................................................................................1 Coastal Plain .................................................................................................................................3 Piedmont........................................................................................................................................3 Blue Ridge .....................................................................................................................................3 Valley and Ridge ...........................................................................................................................4 Appalachian Plateaus .................................................................................................................4 Previous Studies ...................................................................................................................................4 Approach .........................................................................................................................................................4 Site Selection.........................................................................................................................................4 Data Evaluation .....................................................................................................................................8 Flood-Frequency Analysis ...................................................................................................................8 Basin Characteristics ...........................................................................................................................9 Regionalization .............................................................................................................................................10 Definition of Regions ..........................................................................................................................10 Model Development ...........................................................................................................................10 Model Verification and Diagnostics ................................................................................................11 Weighting Multiple Estimates ....................................................................................................................12 Weighting of Independent Estimates ..............................................................................................13 Peak-Flow Characteristics .........................................................................................................................13 Other Methods for Estimation at Ungaged Sites ....................................................................................13 Examples of Calculating Peak-Flow Estimates .......................................................................................14 Use of Regression Equations ............................................................................................................14 Drainage-Area Ratio Method ...........................................................................................................14 Ungaged Site with Nearby Gage ......................................................................................................15 Gaged Site ............................................................................................................................................15 Summary........................................................................................................................................................15 Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................16 References ....................................................................................................................................................16 Glossary .........................................................................................................................................................20 Appendix 1. Curves and residual plots for candidate single-parameter regional regression equations for estimating peak flows of streams in Virginia ..........................................................................................................CD in pocket Appendix 2. Curves and residual plots for candidate multi-parameter regional regression equations for estimating peak flows of streams in Virginia ..........................................................................................................CD in pocket iv Figures 1. Map showing selected peak-flow study sites and physiographic provinces for application of peak-flow regional estimating equations ..................................................2 2. Example leverage plots showing significant explanatory power, insignificant explanatory power, and evidence of collinearity ..................................................................11 Tables 1. Sites used in the study and their identifying information ..................................CD in pocket 2. Peak-flow characteristics of streamgaging stations in Virginia ........................................21 3. Regional regression equations for estimating peak flows of streams in Virginia .............5 4. Statistics summarizing basin characteristics selected for regional regression of peak flows in Virginia .........................................................................................CD in pocket 5. Selected basin characteristics, their definitions, and datasources ....................................6 6. Selected basin characteristics at peak-flow streamgaging stations in Virginia ..................................................................................................................CD in pocket Conversion Factors Inch/Pound to SI Multiply By To obtain Length inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm) inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm) foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m) mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km) Area acre 0.4047 hectare (ha) square mile (mi2) 259.0 hectare (ha) Volume gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3) cubic foot (ft3) 0.02832 cubic meter (m3) acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter (m3) Flow rate cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s) Hydraulic gradient foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer (m/km) Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1929 (NAVD 29). Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Elevation, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum. Peak-Flow Characteristics of Virginia Streams By Samuel H. Austin, Jennifer L. Krstolic, and Ute Wiegand Abstract landscapes. Peak-flow estimates provide a basis for analysis of future streamflow response to changes in ecosystem and Peak-flow annual
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5
    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5 DATABASE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND DATA DICTIONARY 1 June 2013 Prepared for: United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21403 Prepared By: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, MD 21403 By Jacqueline Johnson Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin To receive additional copies of the report please call or write: The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 301-984-1908 Funds to support the document The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.0; Database Design Documentation And Data Dictionary was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant CB- CBxxxxxxxxxx-x Disclaimer The opinion expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the U.S. Government, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the several states or the signatories or Commissioners to the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District of Columbia. ii The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape
    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape Prepared by: Scott M. Strickland Julia A. King Martha McCartney with contributions from: The Pamunkey Indian Tribe The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Prepared for: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay & Colonial National Historical Park The Chesapeake Conservancy Annapolis, Maryland The Pamunkey Indian Tribe Pamunkey Reservation, King William, Virginia The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Adamstown, King William, Virginia The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Mattaponi Reservation, King William, Virginia St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland October 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of its management of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail, the National Park Service (NPS) commissioned this project in an effort to identify and represent the York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape. The work was undertaken by St. Mary’s College of Maryland in close coordination with NPS. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept represents “the context of the American Indian peoples in the Chesapeake Bay and their interaction with the landscape.” Identifying ICLs is important for raising public awareness about the many tribal communities that have lived in the Chesapeake Bay region for thousands of years and continue to live in their ancestral homeland. ICLs are important for land conservation, public access to, and preservation of the Chesapeake Bay. The three tribes, including the state- and Federally-recognized Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes and the state-recognized Mattaponi tribe, who are today centered in their ancestral homeland in the Pamunkey and Mattaponi river watersheds, were engaged as part of this project. The Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes participated in meetings and driving tours.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Plan
    SPOTSYLVANIA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Adopted by the Spotsylvania County Board of Supervisors November 14, 2013 Updated: June 14, 2016 August 9, 2016 May 22, 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to the many people who contributed to development of this Comprehensive Plan. The Spotsylvania County Board of Supervisors Ann L. Heidig David Ross Emmitt B. Marshall Gary F. Skinner Timothy J. McLaughlin Paul D. Trampe Benjamin T. Pitts The Spotsylvania County Planning Commission Mary Lee Carter Richard H. Sorrell John F. Gustafson Robert Stuber Cristine Lynch Richard Thompson Scott Mellott The Citizen Advisory Groups Land Use Scott Cook Aviv Goldsmith Daniel Mahon Lynn Smith M.R. Fulks Suzanne Ircink Eric Martin Public Facilities Mike Cotter Garrett Garner Horace McCaskill Chris Folger George Giddens William Nightingale Transportation James Beard M.R. Fulks Mike Shiflett Mark Vigil Rupert Farley Greg Newhouse Dale Swanson Historic & Natural Resources Mike Blake Claude Dunn Larry Plating George Tryfiates John Burge Donna Pienkowski Bonita Tompkins C. Douglas Barnes, County Administrator, and County Staff Spotsylvania County Comprehensive Plan Adopted November 14, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction and Vision Chapter 2 Land Use Future Land Use Map Future Land Use Map – Primary Development Boundary Zoom Chapter 3 Transportation & Thoroughfare Plan Thoroughfare Plan List Thoroughfare Plan Map Chapter 4 Public Facilities Plan General Government Map Public Schools Map Public Safety Map Chapter 5 Historic Resources Chapter 6 Natural Resources Appendix A Land Use – Fort A.P. Hill Approach Fan Map Appendix B Public Facilities – Parks and Recreation Appendix C Historic Resources Appendix D Natural Resources Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION AND VISION INTRODUCTION AND VISION – Adopted 11/14/2013; Updated 6/14/2016 & 5/22/2018 Page 1 INTRODUCTION The Spotsylvania County Comprehensive Plan presents a long range land use vision for the County.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheets for Impaired (Category 4 Or 5) Waters in 2020
    Fact Sheets for Impaired (Category 4 or 5) Waters in 2020 York River Basin Cause Group Code: F01L-01-HG Lake Gordonsville Cause Location: Includes the entirety of Lake Gordonsville, also known as Bowlers Mill Lake. City / County: Louisa Co. Use(s): Fish Consumption Cause(s) / VA Category: Mercury in Fish Tissue / 5A The fish consumption use is categorized as impaired due to a Virginia Department of Health, Division of Health Hazards Control, mercury fish consumption advisory. The advisory, dated 09/30/04, limits largemouth bass consumption to no more than two meals per month. Additionally, an exceedance of the risk-based tissue value (TV) of 300 ppb for mercury (HG) was recorded in 2 species (largemouth bass and bluegill sunfish) of fish sampled (5 total excursions) in 2017 at fish tissue monitoring station 8- DOV001.20, near the dam. Cycle TMDL Cause First Dev. Water Assessment Unit / Water Name / Location Desc. Category Cause Name Listed Priority Size VAN-F01L_DOV01A06 / Lake Gordonsville / Segment includes all 5A Mercury in Fish Tissue 2006 L 77.31 of Lake Gordonsville. Lake Gordonsville Estuary Reservoir River Fish Consumption (Sq. Miles) (Acres) (Miles) Mercury in Fish Tissue - Total Impaired Size by Water Type: 77.31 Sources: Source Unknown Final 2020 Appendix 5 - 3113 Fact Sheets for Impaired (Category 4 or 5) Waters in 2020 York River Basin Cause Group Code: F01R-01-BAC South Anna River Cause Location: Begins at the headwaters of the South Anna River and continues downstream until the confluence with Dove Fork. Begins again at the start of waterbody F02R, where Wheeler Creek intersects the South Anna River, and continues downstream until the confluence with Rock Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Orange County, Virginia 2013 Comprehensive Plan
    ORANGE COUNTY, VIRGINIA 2013 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 17th, 2013 Amended on July 14th, 2015, on October 27th, 2015, and on May 8th, 2018 This page intentionally left blank. 2013 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Sustain the rural character of Orange County while enhancing and improving the quality of life for all its citizens. Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements .............................................................................. 7 A Very Brief History of Orange County, Virginia .......................................... 7 I. Introduction: Why a Comprehensive Plan? ........................................ 10 A. Statutory Authority .................................................................. 10 B. Purpose of the Plan ................................................................. 10 C. Utilizing this Plan .................................................................... 11 D. The Vision for Orange County ...................................................... 12 II. Existing Land Uses ...................................................................... 12 A. Overview .............................................................................. 12 B. Forest and Woodlands ............................................................... 13 C. Agricultural ........................................................................... 13 D. Residential ............................................................................ 13 E. Public and Private Easements ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Dark Run and Robinson River
    Upper York River Basin Watershed Implementation Plan Prepared By: Blue Ridge Environmental Solutions, Inc. Submitted: August 8, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Review of TMDL Study ................................................................................................................ 1 Public Participation ..................................................................................................................... 2 Implementation Actions ............................................................................................................. 2 Measurable Goals and Milestones for Attaining Water Quality Standards ............................... 3 Stakeholder’s Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................... 4 Integration with Other Watershed Plans .................................................................................... 4 Potential Funding Sources .......................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 6 STATE AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ........................................
    [Show full text]
  • 202B Targeting Resources Report.Pdf
    DRAFT REPORT Focusing Resources to Restore and Protect the Chesapeake Bay and its Tributary Waters Executive Order 13508, Section 202b Report Draft material prepared for the 24 November 2009 Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay Disclaimer: This document reflects the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) revised report under Section 202(b) of Executive Order 13508 (EO) making recommendations to the Federal Leadership Committee (FLC) for a strategy to target resources to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay and its tributary waters. This revised document is published to supplement the FLC’s publication of a Draft Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay (issued November 9, 2009). This revised report includes recommendations that may change as the FLC’s draft strategy is further refined based on public comments. This revised document is not a final agency action subject to judicial review; nor is it a rule. Nothing in this revised document is meant to, or in fact does, affect the substantive or legal rights of third parties or bind USDA or other agencies collaborating in the development of this report. While this revised document reflects USDA’s and collaborating agencies’ current thinking regarding recommendations to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay, USDA and the collaborating agencies reserve the discretion to modify the recommendations included in the report as they work with the FLC to refine the draft strategy, or act in a manner different from this report as appropriate. ii Draft material prepared for the 24 November 2009 Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay About this Document Executive Order 13508, Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration, issued a call to action “to protect and restore the health, heritage, natural resources, and social and economic value of the Nation’s largest estuarine ecosystem.” Section 202(b) of the Executive Order directs the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • County of Louisa
    County of Louisa Water Quality Management Plan and Groundwater Study Prepared By: T/lOlllas Jeffersoll Plallnillg District COII/missiofl I'irgillia Divisioll of I'vlifleral Resollrces Louisa COUIII)' Plallfling Departlllel!1 Louisa Couflt)' Water Aut//Oir!)' Draper -Idell -hsociates lallllar\ 1l)l)X County of Louisa Water Quality Management Plan and Groundwater Study Prepared By: Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Virginia Division of Mineral Resources Louisa County Planning Department Louisa County Water Authoirty Draper Aden Associates January, 1998 Table of Contents Executive Summary 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Objectives .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Potential Growth Areas .............................................................................................. 1-2 1.3 General Infonnation ................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 HistorylBackground ................................................................................................... 1-4 1.5 Previous Reports and Infonnation ............................................................................. 1-4 2.0 Present Water Quality in Louisa County .................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Watersheds ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Anna Special Area Plan I
    I LAKE ANNA SPECIAL AREA PLAN I March 2000 LAKE ANNA SPECIAL AREA PLAN COMMITTEE LAKE ANNA SPECIAL AREA PLAN COMMITTEE Jack Bertron, Chair Gerald Root, Vice-Chair Joe Bailey Luther Bergstrom Herb Distefano Ralph England Johnny Finch Tom Graves George O'Connell William Rupp Fred Seward Jack Speer Staff Team John P. "Pete" Bradshaw, Director of Planning, County of Louisa Stephen Griffin, Director of Planning, County of Spotsylvania Debbie Kendall, Director of Planning, County of Orange Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director, Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Steve Manster,. Executive Director, Rappahannock Area Development Commission Gary Christie, Executive Director, Rappahannock Rapidan Regional Commission Rochelle Garwood, Environmental Planner, Thomas jefferson Planning District Commission Tabl~ of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY •................................................•..........................................•.......•............. i PURPOSE .............•..•..................... ..... ...... ......................................................................................... .... .. i MAJOR FINDINGS ....•............................................................................................................................... i STUDY CONCLUSIONS .. .................................................. ............. ...... ............ ... .. .................................... ii PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... .............. .. .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Water Supply Plan
    Orange County, Virginia Orange County Water Supply Plan Report Draft Copy Wiley|Wilson Comm. No. 206060.00 July 6, 2007 Revised April 29, 2009 Orange County, Virginia Orange County Water Supply Plan Report Draft Copy Wiley|Wilson Comm. No. 206060.00 July 6, 2007 Revised April 29, 2009 Contact: Timothy R. Wagner, P.E. Project Manager 434.455.3681 .direct 434.947.1659 .fax [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... 1 Technical Memorandum Number 1 Figures .............................................................................................................................. 2 Tables ............................................................................................................................... 3 Table of Contents..............................................................................................................4 Report ............................................................................................................................... 5 Technical Memorandum Number 2 Table of Contents..............................................................................................................6 Report ............................................................................................................................... 7 Appendices Adequacy Analysis for Orange County Water Supply Study Calculations............................................................................................................A
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls Concentrations in Fish from Virginia Watersheds in 2017
    Evaluation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls Concentrations in Fish from Virginia Watersheds in 2017 Chowan James Rivers, Lake Anna, Lake Gordonsville, Motts Run Reservoir, and Potomac River Embayments VIRGINIA Letter Health Consultation May 21, 2019 Virginia Department of Health Division of Environmental Epidemiology 109 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Department of Health – Office of Epidemiology M. Norman Oliver, MD, MA PO BOX 2448 TTY 7-1-1 OR STATE HEALTH COMMISSIONER RICHMOND, VA 1-800-828-1120 May 21, 2019 Gabriel Darkwah Lab Data Coordinator Virginia Department of Environmental Quality 1111 E. Main Street Suite 1400 Richmond, VA 23219 Dear Mr. Darkwah, Thank you for providing the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) fish tissue concentrations results for fish and sediment collected in 2017 from Chowan and James Rivers, Lake Anna, Lake Gordonsville, Motts Run Reservoir, and Potomac River Embayments. The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) has finished reviewing the results for public health implications as requested. BACKGROUND AND RESULTS In October 2000, pursuant to § 32.1-248.01 of the Code of Virginia, VDH published guidelines for issuance of fish consumption advisories due to contamination of fish, including PCBs. In 2012, VDH updated the guidelines for establishing a fish consumption advisory. These 1 guidelines are available at Virginia Regulatory Town Hall. The current fish consumption guidelines for PCBs are as follows: • When PCBs levels in fish range from 100 to below 500 ppb, VDH recommends limiting consumption of contaminated fish species to two 8-ounce meals per month. • When levels equal or exceed 500 ppb in fish, VDH recommends avoiding consumption of contaminated fish species.
    [Show full text]
  • Distance to Major Cities
    III. LOUISA COUNTY TODAY LOCATION The location of Louisa County is advantageous to appeal to business, industry, and individuals. The proximity to major cities, the mid-point location between I-95 and I-81, the two north/south interstates in Virginia, and the four County interchanges along I-64, as well as the U.S. routes crossing the County provide access to the areas the County deems most suitable for growth. These factors support the County's approach to focusing growth in specific areas of the County, taking advantage of the location. Distance to Major Cities NYC Washington DC. Chicago Pittsburgh 327 mi. 95 mi. 641 mi. 300 mi. Charlottesville 35 mi. LOUISA Richmond 51 mi. Nashville 585 mi. Norfolk 145 mi. Atlanta Charlotte 518 mi. 283 mi. Louisa County encompasses nearly 514 square miles or 328,960 acres of Central Virginia. The County extends about 26 miles from north to south, and 34 miles east to west. Louisa shares its western boundary with Albemarle County and its eastern boundary with Hanover County. To the north of Louisa lie Orange and Spotsylvania Counties, and to the south, Fluvanna and Goochland Counties. The incorporated towns of Louisa and Mineral are centrally located within the County. The County is part of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District, one of twenty-one planning districts established by the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1970. Map #1 illustrates the location of the County in the state and region. DEMOGRAPHICS The people, natural and built assets of Louisa County are substantial. Historically the sense of community has strengthened the County and carried it through many changes.
    [Show full text]