Skip to main content
Product

IDENTIFYING AND PRESERVING HIGH WATER MA

$16.00
Available

Product Details

Product Number
534233
Series
TM-03-A24
Scale
NO SCALE
Alternate ID
TM-03-A24
Authors
BENTON D MCGEE
Version Date
01/01/2016
Media
Paper
Format
Bound

Additional Details

Description
Identifying and preserving high-water mark data

Techniques and Methods 3-A24

By: Todd A. Koenig, Jennifer L. Bruce, Jim O'Connor, Benton D. McGee, Robert R. Holmes Jr., Ryan Hollins, Brandon T. Forbes, Michael S. Kohn, Mathew Schellekens, Zachary W. Martin, and Marie C. Peppler

https://doi.org/10.3133/tm3A24

First posted March 8, 2016

For additional information, contact: Chief, Office of Surface Water

U.S. Geological Survey

415 National Center

12201 Sunrise Valley Drive

Reston, VA 20192

http://water.usgs.gov/osw/

Abstract

High-water marks provide valuable data for understanding recent and historical flood events. The proper collection and recording of high-water mark data from perishable and preserved evidence informs flood assessments, research, and water resource management. Given the high cost of flooding in developed areas, experienced hydrographers, using the best available techniques, can contribute high-quality data toward efforts such as public education of flood risk, flood inundation mapping, flood frequency computations, indirect streamflow measurement, and hazard assessments.

This manual presents guidance for skilled high-water mark identification, including marks left behind in natural and man-made environments by tranquil and rapid flowing water. This manual also presents pitfalls and challenges associated with various types of flood evidence that help hydrographers identify the best high-water marks and assess the uncertainty associated with a given mark. Proficient high-water mark data collection contributes to better understanding of the flooding process and reduces risk through greater ability to estimate flood probability.

The U.S. Geological Survey, operating the Nation’s premier water data collection network, encourages readers of this manual to familiarize themselves with the art and science of high-water mark collection. The U.S. Geological survey maintains a national database at http://water.usgs.gov/floods/FEV/ that includes high-water mark information for many flood events, and local U.S. Geological Survey Water Science Centers can provide information to interested readers about participation in data collection and flood documentation efforts as volunteers or observers.

Survey Date
2016
Print Date
2016
Height In Inches
11.000
Length In Inches
8.500
Two Sided
Yes
Pieces
1
Languages
English
Related Items
WATER QUALITY OHIO DISTRICT OH, OH
Quality-assurance/quality-control manual for collection and analysis of water-quality data in the Ohio District, US Geological Survey
TRIGONOMETRIC LEVELING IN THE USGS
Procedures and best practices for trigonometric leveling in the U.S. Geological Survey <p> <p> First posted December 23, 2020 <p> For additional information, contact: <p> Director, New York Water Science Center U.S. Geological Survey 425 Jordan Road Troy, NY 12180–8349 <p> <p> Abstract <p> <p> With the advent of highly precise total stations and modern surveying instrumentation, trigonometric leveling has become a compelling alternative to conventional leveling methods for establishing vertical-control networks and for perpetuating a datum to field sites. Previous studies of trigonometric-leveling measurement uncertainty proclaim that first-, second-, and third-order accuracies may be achieved if strict leveling protocols are rigorously observed. Common field techniques to obtain quality results include averaging zenith angles and slope distances observed in direct and reverse instrument orientation (F1 and F2, respectively), multiple sets of reciprocal observations, quality meteorological observations to correct for the effects of atmospheric refraction, and electronic distance measurements that generally do not exceed 500 feet. In general, third-order specifications are required for differences between F1 and F2 zenith angles and slope distances; differences between redundant instrument-height measurements; section misclosure determined from reciprocal observations; and closure error for closed traverse. For F1 observations such as backsight check and check shots, the construction-grade specification is required for elevation differences between known and observed values. <p> <p> Recommended specifications for trigonometric-leveling equipment include a total station instrument with an angular uncertainty specification less than or equal to plus or minus 5 arc-seconds equipped with an integrated electronic distance measurement device with an uncertainty specification of less than or equal to plus or minus 3 millimeters plus 3 parts per million. A paired data collector or integrated microprocessor should have the capability to average multiple sets of measurements in direct and reverse instrument orientation. Redundant and independent measurements by the survey crew and automated or manual reduction of slant heights to the vertical equivalent are recommended to obtain quality instrument heights. Horizontal and vertical collimation tests should be conducted daily during trigonometric-leveling surveys, and electronic distance-measurement instruments should be tested annually on calibrated baselines maintained by the National Geodetic Survey. Specifications that were developed by the National Geodetic Survey for geodetic leveling have been adapted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the purpose of developing standards for trigonometric leveling, which are identified as USGS Trigonometric Level I (TL I), USGS Trigonometric Level II (TL II), USGS Trigonometric Level III (TL III), and USGS Trigonometric Level IV (TL IV). TL I, TL II, and TL III surveys have a combination of first, second, and third geodetic leveling specifications that have been modified for plane leveling. The TL III category also has specifications that are adapted from construction-grade standards, which are not recognized by the National Geodetic Survey for geodetic leveling. A TL IV survey represents a leveling approach that does not generally meet criteria of a TL I, TL II, or TL III survey. <p> <p> Site conditions, such as highly variable topography, and the need for cost-effective, rapid, and accurate data collection in response to coastal or inland flooding have emphasized the need for an alternative approach to conventional leveling methods. Trigonometric leveling and the quality-assurance methods described in this manual will accommodate most site and environmental conditions, but measurement uncertainty is potentially variable and dependent on the survey method. Two types of closed traverse surveys have been identified as reliable methods to establish and perpetuate vertical control: the single-run loop traverse and double-run spur traverse. Leveling measurements for a double-run spur traverse are made in the forward direction from the origin to the destination and are then retraced along the same leveling route in the backward direction, from the destination to the origin. Every control point in a double-run spur traverse is occupied twice. Leveling measurements for a single-run loop traverse are made in the forward direction from the origin point to the destination, and then from the destination to the origin point, along a different leveling route. The only point that is redundantly occupied for the single-run loop traverse is the origin. An open traverse method is also considered an acceptable approach to establish and perpetuate vertical control if the foresight prism height is changed between measurement sets to ensure at least two independent observations. A modified version of leap-frog leveling is recommended for all traverse surveys because it reduces measurement uncertainty by forcing the surveying instrumentation into a level and centered condition over the ground point as the instrumentation is advanced to the objective. Sideshots are considered any radial measurement made from the total station that is not part of a traverse survey. F1 and F2 observations are recommended for sideshots measurements for projects that require precise elevations. Quality-assurance measurements made in F1 from the station to network-control points should be considered for surveys that require a high quantity of sideshots. <p> <p> The accuracy of a trigonometric-leveling survey essentially depends on four components (1) the skill and experience of the surveyor, (2) the environmental or site conditions, (3) the surveying method, and (4) the quality of the surveying instrumentation. Although components one and two can sometimes be difficult to evaluate and be highly variable, the objective of this manual is to disseminate information needed to identify, maintain, and operate quality land-surveying instrumentation, and to document procedures and best practices for preparing and executing precision trigonometric-leveling surveys in the USGS. <p>
COLORADO WATER SCIENCE CENTER POSTCARD
U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center Postcard <p> <p> General Information Product 224 <p> <p> By: Jeannette H. Oden <p> <p> https://doi.org/10.3133/gip224 <p> <p> First posted June 21, 2023 <p> <p> For additional information, contact: <p> <p> Director, Colorado Water Science Center <p> https://www.usgs.gov/centers/colorado-water-science-center/ <p> U.S. Geological Survey <p> Box 25046, Mail Stop 415 <p> Denver, CO 80225 <p> <p> Abstract <p> <p> The U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center provides timely, high-quality science information on Colorado’s water resources to help planners, managers, and others to make the decisions necessary for the use of these limited and shared resources throughout the State. <p>