[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Coastal Zone information iL' 7@ Center A& I"'- 12=12 1P [)ENI@lXr rf act; Watt@r GB 705 G73 G74 y@urolo y 19xx appendix 2 EAT LAKES BASIN F STUPW PO Great Lakes Basin Framework Study APPENDIX 2 SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY GREAT LAKES BASIN COMMISSION Prepared by Surface Water Hydrology Work Group Sponsored by U.S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Published by the Public Information Office, Great Lakes Basin Commission, 3475 Plymouth Road, P.O. Box 999, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106. Cover photo by Kristine Moore Meves. This appendix to the Report ofthe Great Lakes Basin Framework Study was prepared at field level under the auspices of the Great Lakes Basin Commission to provide data for use in the conduct of the Study and preparation of the Report. The conclusions and recommendations herein are those of the group preparing the appendix and not necessarily those of the Basin Commission. The recommendations of the Great Lakes Basin Commission are included in the Report. The copyright material reproduced in this volume of the Great Lakes. Basin Framework Study was printed with the kind consent of the copyright holders. Section 8, title 17, United States Code, provides: The publication or republication by the Government, either separately or in a public document, of any material in which copyright is subsisting shall not be taken to cause any abridgement or annulment of the copyright or to authorize any use or appropriation of such copyright material without the consent of the copyright proprietor. The Great Lakes Basin Commission requests that no copyrighted material in this volume be republished or reprinted without the permission of the author. OUTLINE Report Appendix 1: Alternative Frameworks Appendix 2: Surface Water Hydrology Appendix 3: Geology and Ground Water Appendix 4: Limnology of Lakes and Embayments Appendix 5: Mineral Resources Appendix 6: Water Supply-Municipal, Industrial, and Rural Appendix 7: Water Quality Appendix 8: Fish Appendix C9: Commercial Navigation Appendix R9: Recreational Boating Appendix 10: Power Appendix 11: Levels and Flows Appendix 12: Shore Use and Erosion Appendix 13: Land Use and Management Appendix 14: Flood Plains Appendix 15: Irrigation Appendix 16: Drainage Appendix 17: Wildlife Appendix 18: Erosion and Sedimentation Appendix 19: Economic and Demographic Studies Appendix F20: Federal Laws, Policies, and Institutional Arrangements Appendix S20: State Laws, Policies, and Institutional Arrangements Appendix 21: Outdoor Recreation Appendix 22: Aesthetic and Cultural Resources Appendix 23: Health Aspects Environmental Impact Statement SYNOPSIS Nearly all surface-water runoff from tribu- goes dry or the supply is replenished by pre- tary streams in the Great Lakes Basin is cipitation. supplied from precipitation falling within its River forecasting is used to predict the boundaries. The influence of the Great Lakes amount of water that will find its way into together with bordering highlands is respon- rivers and streams and the time it will take to sible for variations in areal and seasonal dis- reach them under different conditions of tribution of precipitation over the Basin. The temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation. rather wide variation in runoff among the Although river forecasting is usually as- planning subareas is primarily due to differ- sociated with flood warning procedures, it can ences in geology, surficial features, climate, be of equal value when dealing with other and land use rather than to difference in an- water management problems such as drought nual precipitation. flows. Flooding by rivers in the Basin is most An evaluation of the total surface water common in late winter or early spring. Flood- availability of a river basin is fundamental to ing is most often caused by high-intensity sound water resource planning. The limits to rainstorms or by a combination of snowmelt which a stream can supply or yield water must and rainfall on partially frozen ground. Flood be known before that fixed minimum amount stages are frequently increased by ice jams, can be allocated to sometimes conflicting de- especially at the mouth of a river where its mands upon the water. In order to satisfy fu- capacity can be restricted by either sheet ice ture water needs, it may be necessary in some or windblown ice from the Lake. cases to stabilize streamflows through reser- Low flows occur each year on streams voir control. throughout the Basin, as runoff diminishes Because of the unique hydrologic aspects of due to increased losses by evapotranspiration the Great Lakes Basin, additional studies are and seasonal variances in rainfall distribu- required of peak flows, low flows, and snow- tions. After surface runoff ceases, the entire melt runoff. An expanded stream forecasting flow of the stream is drawn from ground-water program is also recommended to provide ser- storage. As this storage is depleted, vice to the remaining areas that have flood streamflow diminishes until either the stream hazards. v FOREWORD The material used in this appendix was fur- in the various planning subareas was the re- nished by the Geological Survey, U.S. De- sponsibility of work group members from the partment of the Interior; Soil Conservation U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul Dis- Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; De- trict, for Planning Subareas 1.1 and 1.2; partment of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, for Planning Subareas 2.1 Buffalo District, Chicago District, Detroit Dis- and 2.2; Detroit District, for Planning Sub- trict, and St. Paul District; the States of Il- areas 2.3, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, and parts of 4.2; and linois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Buffalo District, for Planning Subareas 4.3, York, Ohio, and Wisconsin; and the Common- 4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and parts of 4.2. Work group wealth of Pennsylvania. This appendix was members from the States of Illinois, Indiana, prepared by the Surface Water Hydrology Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Wis- Work Group. consin, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, The Surface Water Hydrology Work Group and the U.S. Soil Conservation Service fur- and its chairman from the St. Paul District, nished information on reservoir sites, agen- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, consolidated cies gathering data, bibliographic informa- data furnished by other work group members, tion, and published hydrological reports. All coordinated work, prepared the appendix nar- work group members also furnished rative, and published the draft appendix. The suggested recommendations, guidance, and U.S. Geological Survey, through its district of- constructive comments during review of the fices located within the Great Lakes Basin, its draft appendix. The National Weather Service member on the work group, and its published of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- reports, statistical summaries, and water ministration and the various State work supply papers, furnished most of the basic sur- group members furnished information on face water runoff data included in the report. forecasting. Coordination of data-gathering and analysis vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page OUTLINE .................................................................... iii SYNOPSIS ................................................................... v FOREWORD ................................................................. A LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ ix LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................... x INTRODUCTION ............................................................. xv Objective and Scope ....................................................... xv Method of Analysis ........................................................ xv Historical Background ..................................................... xv Study Relationship ........................................................ xv 1 HYDROLOGIC DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM ......................... 1 1.1 Agencies Gathering Hydrologic Data ................................. 1 1.2 U.S. Geological Survey Program ...................................... 1 1.3 Hydrologic Areas ..................................................... 1 1.4 Hydrologic Stations ................................................... 2 2 RUNOFF ANALYSIS ..................................................... 25 2.1 General ................... ........................................... 25 2.2 Monthly Distribution of Runoff ....................................... 25 2.3 AnnualRunoff ........................................................ 25 2.4 Flow Duration ........................................................ 26 2.5 Runoff Volumes ...................................................... 26 2.6 Infiltration Rate and Base Strearnflow ............................... 26 3 FLOOD CHARACTERISTICS ............................................. 37 3.1 General ..................... ******"*****,*************************"* 37 3.2 Annual Peak Flood Frequencies ...................................... 37 3.3 Partial Duration Flood Frequencies ................................. 38 3.4 Alternative Frequency Methodologies ................................ 38 3.5 Flood Volumes .................. ..................................... 39 3.6 Exceptions and Special Cases ......................................... 39 4 DROUGHTFLOWS ....................................................... 57 .4.1 General ............................................................... 57 4.2 Seasonal Occurrences ................................................. 57 4.3 Low-Flow Frequencies ................................................ 57 vii viii Appendix 2 Page 5 SURFACE WATER AVAILABILITY STUDIES .......................... 71 5.1 General ............................................................... 71 5.2 Hydrologic Conversion Factors ....................................... 71 5.3 Mass Curve-Storage Volumes ......................................... 71 5.4 Storage Yield Relationships for Selected Stations ..................... 72 5.5 Sample Storage Requirement Calculation ............................. 72 5.6 Streamflow Routing Characteristics .................................. 72 6 RESERVOIR SITES ...................................................... 85 6.1 General ............................................................... 85 6.2 Existing and Potential Sites .......................................... 85 6.3 Upground Storage Reservoirs ........................................ 85 7 RIVER FLOW AND FLOOD FORECASTING ............................. 117 7.1 General ... 117 7.2 Flood Warnings ....................................................... 117 7.3 Operation of Water Control Structures ............................... 118 7.4 National Weather Service Great Lakes River and Flood Forecast Program .............................................................. 118 7.5 National Weather Service Precipitation Probability Forecast Program 119 8 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................... 121 8.1 General ............................................................... 121 8.2 Data Collection ....................................................... 121 8.3 Data Analysis ........................................................ 122 8.4 Additional Hydrologic Research and Development Required .......... 122 SUMMARY ................................................................... 125 Objectives ................................................................. 125 Data Collection ............................................................ 125 Data Analysis ............................................................. 125 Runoff Analysis .... ...................................................... 125 Flood Characteristics ...................................................... 125 Drought Flows ............................................................ 125 Surface Water Availability ................................................ 126 Reservoir Sites ............................................................ 126 GLOSSARY .................................................................. 127 LIST OF REFERENCES ..................................................... 129 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................ 131 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2-1 Flow of Selected Stations ................................................ 19 2-2 Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff ................................ 31 2-3 Flood Characteristics of Streams ........................................ 40 2-4 Low-Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations ............ 58 2-5 Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites .................................. 86 2-6 Number of Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites with Surface Area Less Than 500 Acres .......................................................... 115 2-7 River Forecast Points and Hydrologic Reporting Stations ............... 120 2-8 Precipitation Probability Forecast Summary ............................ 120 2-9 Required Streamflow Data Collection Sites .............................. 123 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2-1 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 1.1 ..................... 3 2-2 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 1.2 ..................... 4 2-3 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.1 ..................... 5 2-4 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.2 ..................... 6 2-5 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.3 ..................... 7 2-6 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.4 ..................... 8 2-7 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 3.1 ..................... 9 2-8 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 3.2 ..................... 10 2-9 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.1 ..................... 11 2-10 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.2 ..................... 12 2-11 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.3 ..................... 13 2-12 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.4 ..................... 14 2-13 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.1 ..................... 15 2-14 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.2 ..................... 16 2-15 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.3 ..................... 17 2-16 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, and 2.2 27 2-17 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 2.3, 2.4, 3. 1, and 3.2 28 2-18 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 29 2-19 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 .... 30 2-20 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 1.1, Poplar River at Lutsen, Minn . .......................................................... 48 2-21 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sidnaw, Mich . ..................................................... 48 2-22 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 2.1, Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wis ......................................................... 49 2-23 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind ................................... 49 x List of Figures xi Figure Page 2-24 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Grand Rapids, Mich ..................................................... 50 2-25 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 2.4, Manistee River near Manistee, Mich .................................................... 50 2-26 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 3.1, Au Gres River Near National City, Mich . .............................................. 51 2-27 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 3.2, Cass River at Vassar, Mich ......................................................... 51 2-28 Park Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 4.1, Clinton River at Mt. Clemens, Mich . .................................................. 52 2-29 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 4.2, Maumee River at New Haven, Ind . .................................................... 52 2-30 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 4.3, Grand River at Madison, Ohio .......................................................... 53 2-31 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cattaraugus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y ................................................. 53 2-32 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y . .................................................... 54 2-33 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y ............................................................. 54 2-34 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y ................................................. 55 2-35 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 1.1, Poplar River at Lutsen, Minn .................................................. 63 2-36 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sidnaw, Mich . .............................................. 63 2-37 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.1, Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wis . ................................................ 64 2-38 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind . ........................... 64 2-39 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Lansing, Mich . ................................................ 65 2-40 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.4, Manistee River Near Manistee, Mich . ............................................ 65 2-41 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 3.1, Au Sable River at Mio, Mich ...................................................... 65 2-42 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 3.2, Tit- tabawassee River at Midland, Mich ..................................... 66 xii Appendix 2 Figure Page 2-43 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.1, Huron River Near Dexter, Mich . .............................................. 66 2-44 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.2, Maumee River at Waterville, Ohio ............................................... 67 2-45 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.3, Chagrin River at Willoughby, Ohio .............................................. 67 2-46 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cat- taraugus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y ....................................... 68 2-47 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y . ............................................. 68 2-48 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y . ...................................................... 69 2-49 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y ........................................... 69 2-50 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 1.1, Baptism River at Beaver Bay, Minn . ............................................................. 73 2-51 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sid- naw, Mich . ............................................................. 73 2-52 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.1, Pine River Powerplant, Wis.. 74 2-53 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind ................................................... 74 2-54 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Lansing, Mich .................................................................... 75 2-55 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.4, Muskegon River at Evart, Mich .................................................................... 75 2-56 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 3.1, Rifle River at Sterling, Mich. 76 2-57 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 3.2, Flint River at Fosters, Mich. 76 2-58 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.1, Huron River at Ann Arbor, Mich .................................................................... 77 2-59 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.2, Sandusky River at Fremont, Ohio .................................................................... 77 2-60 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.3, Grand River Near Madison, Ohio .................................................................... 78 2-61 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cattaraugus Creek at Gow- anda, N.Y ............................................................... 78 2-62 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portage- ville, N.Y . .............................................................. 79 List of Figures xiii Figure Page 2-63 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y. 79 2-64 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y ............................................................. 80 2-65 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 1.1, Baptism River at Beaver Bay, Minn ............................................. 81 2-66 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sidnaw, Mich . .............................................. 81 2-67 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 2.1, Pine River at Pine River Powerplant, Wis .......................................... 81 2-68 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind . ........................... 81 2-69 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Lansing, Mich . ................................................ 82 2-70 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 2.4, Muskegon River at Evart, Mich . .................................................. 82 2-71 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 3.1, Rifle River at Sterling, Mich . ................................................ 82 2-72 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 3.2, Flint River at Fosters, Mich .................................................. 82 2-73 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 4.1, Huron River at Ann Arbor, Mich . ............................................. 83 2-74 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 4.2, Sandusky River at Fremont, Ohio ................................................ 83 2-75 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 4.3, Grand River Near Madison, Ohio .............................................. 83 2-76 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cat- taraugus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y ....................................... 83 2-77 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y . ............................................. 84 2-78 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y . ...................................................... 84 2-79 Generalized Storage Yield Relationship, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y ........................................... 84 2-80 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 1.1 .............................. 100 2-81 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 1.2 .............................. 101 2-82 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.1 .............................. 102, xiv Appendix 2 Figure Page 2-83 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.2 .............................. 103 2-84 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.3 .............................. 104 2-85 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.4 .............................. 105 2-86 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 3.1 .............................. 106 2-87 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 3.2 .............................. 107 2-88 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.1 .............................. 108 2-89 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.2 .............................. 109 2-90 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.3 .............................. 110 2-91 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.4 .............................. ill 2-92 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.1 .............................. 112 2-93 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.2 .............................. 113 2-94 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.3 ............................... 114 INTRODUCTION Objective and Scope that simulates conditions in ungaged areas based on data obtained in similar hydro- The overall objective of this appendix is to logic areas. Thus, the method of analysis provide a generalized evaluation of surface provides the framework study planner with a water runoff entering the five Great Lakes simplified but realistic tool for generating and the St. Lawrence River from tributary hydrologic data representative of conditions streams in the United States. Of the 296,000 for areas generally void of streamflow records. square miles in the entire Great Lakes Basin For purposes of analysis, this appendix uses above the Lake Ontario outlet, approximately the boundaries of the planning subareas 113,000 square miles of contributory land area shown on Figures 2-1 through 2-15 to develop are in the U.S., and nearly 88,000 square miles generalized data to be representative of all are in Canada. An additional 4,800 square conditions within that planning subarea. miles contribute to the St. Lawrence River in the U.S. below the Lake Ontario outlet. An analysis of runoff potentials from streams in Historical Background Canada has not been made as part of this ap- pendix. The appendix has been developed to Various agencies on both the State level the detail and scope required to determine and Federal level have been gathering and only basic information needed to formulate a compiling surface water hydrology records comprehensive framework plan for manage- in the Basin since the early 1800s in the ment of water and related land resources of eastern end and early 1900s on the western the Great Lakes Basin within the United tributaries to the Basin. As industry moved States. into the Basin to develop the mineral, forest, and water resources, additional hydrologic data were compiled. With the urbanization Method of Analysis and industrialization of the Basin, the hy- drologic regimen has been modified from its Hydrologic determinations formulated in natural state, more so in the eastern regions of this appendix were based on current informa- the Basin than in the northern and western tion already available for the Great Lakes Ba- regions. The evaluation of surface water hy- sin. No new basic data were gathered for the drology has made no attempt to define the appendix. The appendix summarizes the pro- modification of the regimen through the years grams of agencies involved in collecting data; or to anticipate the changes which may occur the existing data collection program; quan- in the future, but only to present the data titative information on the magnitude, dis- currently available. tribution, and variability of surface runoff; water availability; reservoir sites; and runoff forecasting. Study Relationship Methods of analysis used in this appendix for the evaluation of surface water runoff in- The endless cycle of water movement from cluded standard hydrological tools of consoli- the atmosphere to the earth and back to the dation, compilation and summary of field- atmosphere through various stages or proces- gathered runoff records, statistical discharge- ses such as precipitation, interception, runoff, frequency computations, and runoff mass infiltration, percolation, storage, evaporation, curve analysis. In the absence of available and transpiration is called the hydrologic cy- data to cover streamflow conditions in every cle. This appendix evaluates only the surface potential resource reach in the Basin, and water runoff phase of the cycle and, as such, is in view of the cost and time required to de- a basic data appendix. An evaluation of the velop these data, a methodology was developed complete water resource system includes xv xvi Appendix 2 evaluation of the other phases of the cycle and furnished to other work groups as work- which are included in Appendixes 3, 4, 11, 12, ing papers.. The detailed working papers are 14, 16, and 18. This appendix represents a con- available at the office of the Great Lakes solidation and summary of data, prepared by Basin Commission. the Surface Water Hydrology Work Group, Section I HYDROLOGIC DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM 1.1 Agencies Gathering Hydrologic Data tensive and detailed hydrological study, all of these sources should be examined. Within the United States portions of the Analysis of data concerning surface water Great Lakes Basin, the U.S. Geological Survey generated in the Canadian portion of the is the prime agency responsible for gathering, Great Lakes Basin is not within the scope of recording, and publishing of data on surface this report. These data are available in publi- water hydrology. The most complete source of cations by the Inland Waters Branch, De- published data is the Water Supply Papers of partment of Energy, Mines and Resources, the U.S. Geological Survey. The data are col- Surface Water Data, Ontario. lected and prepared for publication in cooper- ation with other Federal, State, local, and pri- vate agencies. To a more limited extent and for 1.2 U.S. Geological Survey Program specific purposes, many other Federal, State, county, and municipal agencies plus public The basic data collection and analysis pro- and private corporations and individuals gram of the Water Resources Division of the gather and record surface water data not pub- U.S. Geological Survey District offices repre- lished in the Water Supply Papers. Federal sents the primary continuing effort in the agencies, in addition to the U.S. Geological United States portion of the Great Lakes Ba- Survey, that gather stage and discharge data sin. Overall Federal effort for the collection of within the Basin include the National basic surface water hydrology data is coordi- Weather, Service, U.S. Army Corps of En- nated by the Geological Survey's Office of gineers, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Water Data Collection (OWDC) in Washington, Department of Health, Education and Wel- D.C. This agency has published several sum- fare, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. maries on the total data collection program in Bureau of Mines, and U.S. Forest Service. the United States. The district office of the State agencies that gather surface water data Geological Survey located in each State in the include the State conservation departments, Great Lakes Basin is responsible for the data departments of natural resources, health de- collection program within that State. Stream partments, pollution control agencies, State gaging stations, which usually measure geological surveys, highway departments, water-surface elevation, are used to collect State water surveys, and other water- basic data. Rating curves are developed for oriented agencies. On the county and munici- each station to relate measured water-surface pal level, surface water data are collected by elevation to the generally more useful Stream highway departments, park commissions, discharge data. Rating curves are developed water works, sanitary and sewer districts, and by measuring average stream velocities and historical societies. Private and public corpo- cross-sectional areas and relating these data rations gathering hydrologic data are gen- to concurring water-surface elevation. Be- erally those that use large quantities of water cause the cross-sectional regimen of many in the industrial process and are, therefore, stations undergoes constant change, the rat- water-oriented. These include paper, elec- ing curves are periodically readjusted to re- trical power, mining, cement, transportation, flect the change. and recreation companies. Many local county and municipal agencies and the water-ori- ented industries are valuable sources for rec- 1.3 Hydrologic Areas ord flood level data. Significant data on record 'floods and droughts can also be found in rec- In addition to showing the boundaries of ords of newspapers, public libraries, and his- planning subareas, the maps on Figures 2@-l torical societies. When conducting an ex- through 2-15 are divided into several hy- 1 2 Appendix 2 drologic areas coincident with the hydrologic each by the Minnesota Power and Light Com- areas and flood frequency regions delineated pany and the Illinois Department of Public in the U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Works and Buildings. Not included are ap- Paper 1677. The hydrologic areas shown in proximately 400 partial-record stations where this paper are delineated on the basis of streamflow data are obtained only during drainage area and runoff characteristics. flood events or periods of low flow. Flow-frequency determinations for each U.S. Activities reported by agencies other than Geological Survey gaging station are avail- the U.S. Geological Survey are usually those able and on record in the files of the Great tailored to that agency's specific mission, such Lakes Basin Commission. The hydrologic area as reservoir management or hydroelectric studies available from the U.S. Geological purposes. However, those reported by the U.S. Survey are mentioned here for informational Geological Survey are activities in collabora- purposes only, in the event a more refined tion or cooperation with other agencies. The analysis of an area is desired. data from these activities are available to all water managers and users and are used for many purposes, such as the design of reser- 1.4 Hydrologic Stations voirs, flood plain management, design and maintenance of navigational facilities, and As of January 1970, 648 long-term surface correlation with water quality data. Table 2-1 water stations were reported to be in opera- lists by planning subarea existing hydrologic tion in the Great Lakes region, including stations considered to be hydrologically rep- about 80 inland lake stations. Of this total, 551 resentative of the drainage area and hy- are operated by the U.S. Geological Survey; 74 drologic area in which they are located. For the by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 2 by the most part, the hydrological stations selected Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agricul- were U.S. Geological Survey stations having ture; 11 by the National Weather Service; 3 by at least 15 years of record and not affected, or the Minnesota Ore Operations, United States only slightly affected, by natural or artificial Steel Corporation; 5 by the Metropolitan control, diversion, or regulation. Sanitary District of Greater Chicago; and one Hydrologic Data Collection Program 3 VICINITY MAP SCALE IN MILES 0 S' IW -0. 00 C=@ RiVa, 10 lip 9,.1. Lake COOK rand Marais Be itt /A" *r6l 125 170 LAKE ( 1-11 1 jAuro a ito 0 Chisholm 0 Hibbing eleth 4i? 1. 145 0 Silver Bay lam o, SO Two Harbors APOSTLE ISLANDS Dulut Bayfield ST. UIS Ci.q.et S or eAshla 255 300 270 - CARLTON@ PON lo I nwood 0 co Z W z (1) Isco Z it S1 DOUGLAS BAYFIELD ASHLAND IRON SCALE IN MILES n IM 20 25 LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 275(g HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. 0 CITIES FIGURE 2-1 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 1.1 4 Appendix 2 KEWEENAW ISLE ROYALE Laurium KEWEENAW COUNTY 3 0 Houghton LAKE SUPERIOR Poriage Lake -1 Ontonagon Yellow Dog 5 3 % Marquette Gog ILake 405 00 2 W:kefiel 'ShperningO,@@Negaunee 20 a. Ironwood HOUGHTON od GA 58019 6 ONTONA N 15 A4 EGOGEBII MARQUETTE 5850 /Sc0 S//v ALGER LAKE SUPERIOR Sault Ste. Marie WHITEFISI BAY a Muni Ing Ta qu.,Tiann Newberry LUCE ALGER CHIPPEWA 10"- J." SCALE IN MILES VICINITY MAP IM 20 25 ..... SCALE IN MILES LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12- - HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. "'@@ISLI @RCIYAI 4251P HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. CITIES FIGURE 2-2 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 1.2 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 5 VICINITY MAP I. MILES IRO Paint 6 L ke Mi,higanvn. Iron River River IC I DICK NSO S pi,e River 645 MENOM P-PPI. ron Mount 0 Norwa FLO ENC F Ki2g@rd N, I Esc aba ARINE 660 C*dar FOREST WASHINGTON 68 ISLAND Antigo ANGLADE DE Men I a M OMINEE .L Mari ette 695 75 77p- Oconto .P 710 C" Stu on Bay 9 EM She a Z . L, Ire DOOR SHA A OCONTO KEWAUNEE Lillie lintonvilleO % Algoma .@ OUTA MIE C1 Green Bay r 'fl De Pere Kewaunee upac u BID 79 New 6ndon to* ROWN A MA TOW C WAUPACA .Ppleton Kukauna 8 Menash CALVM ET Neenah 9 \ itow- Two Rivers Chilton anifft C WAUS ARA Oshkosh i 7 1 0 LEGEND WINNEBAGO j PLANNIN REA OUTLINE FOND DU LAC S E GA G SUBA 0 Ripon RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY Greer Lake Fond du Lac bo Sheboygan ---- STATE BOUNDARIES 8 COUNTY BOUNDARIES MAR ETTE GREEN LAKE /1 835 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 6565 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. -',,@P. It. ,a SCALE IN MILES CITIES Emg 0 5 10 5 20 25 FIGURE 2-3 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.1 6 Appendix 2 -T IM, VICINITY MAP SCALEIN MILES 0 WIM WAS I GTON OZAUKEE IT c"' West Bend c. Ca@k Port Washington 0 rt 65 He ford Cedarbur 0Oconorno.oc S= MILES Milwauke 0 5 10 15 @ LEGEND Waukesha PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE South Milwaukee RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY MILWAUKEE STATE BOUNDARIES WAU ESHA Root WALWORTH COUNTY BOUNDARIES HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 10 acine 86592 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATIONAND NO. R 0 CITIES Elkhorn RACI-@ N W,6&@ Kenosha 1W s W 1@@O 4S@I N KENOSHA OHarvard ILLINOIS Zion Waukegan 0 Marengo 0 C rysta I Lake Lake Forest Highland Park Z McHENRY LAKE KANE 0 Elgin COOK C) Saint Charles 0 ,-'NOTE SHORT LINE' ICHIGAN I Tm DU PAG DIANA Aurora 0 ic igan City ail lunhe 11 It R ilesterton 0 La Porte 940 (5 Joliet file call In Iti,er 9 945 9 0 Chicago Heights@) *Valparaiso LA PORTE z Crown Point WILL PORTER 0 Knox LAKE STARKE FIGURE 2-4 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.2 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 7 MON CAL KENT Sparta G@ree Ville 1150 Roc ford SHIAWASSEE 0 AWA 1185 Belding ..: e-'j06-CLINTON Grand Have ndl Walker G nd 4; e N II* 'd @11 r65.1o n I a Sio@y Creek 0 0 Owos 0 1 Ra 60 St. J hn A@orunna Hudsonville. 1% Lowell 1, Durand S .3 1140 crtland I, ingql'ss River Zealand 1180 12 JA NN 10 4 5 Holland ALLEGAN ) 1. 91,14" Grand Ledge 1130 Lansing Hastings 175 Cedar Ri@er 5 % Gun L 0 Cha ott(-@@ 1110 Mason ack Itiv ton Rapids 0 ejo Plairw 11 1- INGHAM South Haven VAN BUREN AMAZOO 6CALHOUN JACKSON 4@- 1050 i attle-Creek-00 i,el lamaz)o 1035 1090 ackson paw paw aw @a 1 106 Marshall Albion 0 Michig Center 1025 Portal; St. Joseph Benton rbor J/ CASS ST. @OSEP ANCHI HILLSDALE 975 CY4 hree Rivers P114,ij. Cold atero Hills ale Bu, anf 0 iles 990 985 Sturgis -/77 18 BERR EN I'VICHIGAN 0 INDIANA it, pi9pe TEUBEN MICHIGAN hart 995 Sout 1005 0 Ang. fB en Goshen N-J LP(j.R E 19 ST. JOSEPH Ligofie, ,fLK ART lz@ Plymouth @endallville 0") MARSHALL SCALE IN MILES 0 5 10 15 20 25 VICINITY MAP LEGEND SCALE IN MILES PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE 100 RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES own 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 1085 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. C, CITIES FIGURE 2-5 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.3 8 Appendix 2 SCHOOLC9AF-T. OV. 9 Manistique, take .95 I\- DETTA ACKINAC 46 550 565 C, 0 Man.istiq a St. Ignace ckinac Island ladston o Strait. of Mdi- Bois 96" Island Escanaba 111"Ver Island (16 Illc' Charlevoix 0 Pe skey M ET Lek yn. North Manitou Island Q I ? HA N South Manitou Island 1 5 T a ANTR J IM take EELANAU BENZIE reverse 11 1235 LEGEND Frankfort C'" I take 70 PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GRAN" RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY IZUKEE STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 1240 12- - HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. Portage 15 12600 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. In. " <@"- a 12 take Cadli Q 0 CITIES Manistee 0 ANISTE ..... - ..Mc. iliac WEXFO----% I R-D ROSCOMMON is Ludingt IT pen. 122 1215 VICINITY MAP MASON LAKE OSCEOLA S LEINM CA.ILES o w1w Big Rapids MECOSTA OCEANA Fremont -5- Whitehall 122 NEWAYGO 0 Muskegon 3 SCALE IN MILES MUSKEGON T@211 il.M' 210-15 FIGURE 2-6 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 2.4 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 9 I:P VICINITY MAP SCALE IN MILES Pin' RiVer CHIPPEWA MACKINAC Corp *i DRUMMOND ISLAND St. I Mackinac Island 7ce STRAITS OF MACKINAC is Blanc Island --- C boygan Ife 130 16 1320 Is Burt Lak Mu lot Lake I / 1305 131 0 Rogers City 80 95 0 1290 2 Grand Lake CHEBOYGAN PRESQ EISLE ong Lake s Gay rd 15 13 0 hu 11 ants Thunder Say OTSEGO NTMORENCY C ALPENA P'Av Hubbard Lake 17 12 Au ' Sbl- Ri Grayling 1365 CRAWFORD OSCODA A 10SCO 13W Oscoda 1400ffj 1391f@ J 1405'@' 14 138 Au aw a City East Tawas LEGEND OGEMAW 38 PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE ARENAC RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY ki'*r STATE BOUNDARIES 20 COUNTY BOUNDARIES SCALE IN MILES 12 HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. SAGINAW RAY 0--" 13650 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. 0 5 10 is 20 0 CITIES FIGURE 2-7 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 3.1 10 Appendix 2 L A K E HURON r7@ Port Austi z Caseville qF it I( CLARE 1 c6co j'v 155 13 t a Harbor Beach GLAD ...... Bad A.e SAGINAW SAY 13 535 1560 1435 P 4 Midland Ess xville As. t le s t- '.1 r@ 12 f Bay City 1500 ISABE L MID AND BAY 41. 1, Louis 13 Sag;haw--0 1515 Is sloa rI--," Ithaca III, 1 14' ;0/ 145 TYS LA Chesanin GRATICIT SA INAW e Mouft Morris F n lint 14 5 48 Lapeer ek .4. Durand 2 LAIR *4, GENESEE 144 Fenta SCALE IN MILES I . 15 20 LEGEND VICINITY MAP PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE ..... SCAIE IN MIIES RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 15BO HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. CITIES FIGURE 2-8 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 3.2 Hydrologic Data Collection Program M VICINITY MAP SCALf IN -LIS 0 z 13 SANILAC _j .0 Por uron 'S CLAI 377LAN D MACOM Holly 25. St. Clair LIVINGSTON Romeo Richmond C31-ake Orl on 23 -RoAlleir Marine City @0 19 Pontiac C, N.. Baltimore Ho.ell 5 Anchor Bay Algonac 0 164 Cie rise ? 1700 L - IT& 24,, 1 '05 / 17200 4 AYNE 1725.,0 ,lortTile o 1730 'Foth 0 D!etr it /LAKE ST. CLAIR 0 22 p e'*' Chell 16 735 1745 nn r or Yps.lant, 25 WASHTENAW at Rock U :_6 00 23 0 Tecumseh 2 5 SCALE IN MILES v., ITS Monroe 0 5 10 15 -drian k' LEGEND PLANNING SU:AREA OUTLINE Ell, slield RIVER BASIN ROUP BOUNDARY 25 STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES LENAWEE -MICHIGAN MONROE V 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. OHIO 1765 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. t, CITIES FIGURE 2-9 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.1 12 Appendix 2 W"!:QE LAKE ERIE I MICHI@N anoile c,. ml.mee Bay 0 1845 Montpel r LUCAS Toledo Kellys Island OTTAWA LLII MS AL FULTON 1935. 10'Issa"01. Port Clint a Sandusky Bay BryanJ85O a umee 0 DEFIANCE Napole Go [I andusky 1795 1780 ng Gree 995 Auburn 1960 F emont 1990 01411 z 0 2 0 .1 25 SA S Y ERIE ianc Bellev Norwalk 1805 183 CT k 915 HENRY W D Fo olia IS 30 Pyldmg. PUTNAM / ( --\,-21 "Rwe 3 1, Tiffin 0 rd y@ ilard Fort 7yn PAULDI $Ian I SENECA HURON 82 A@LEN VAN RT 1891 197 CRAWFORD Van Wert 1 5 ALLEN Carey 965 1815 COCK Bucyru D lp s 0 1905 6 .@a U per an sky 160 0 - ':Ada 7 875 Lima YANDOT ADAMS ER ER AU LAIZE ap onet.,---" St. Marys SCALE IN MILES P--I P--I 0 5 10 15 20 25 LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 1835 9 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. sul.m VICINITY MAP 0 CITIES C-D. SCALE IN MILES C.- -sc ... LAKE CA-. 0WA__ "'0 FIGURE 2-10 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.2 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 13 nneaut C k 0 shtabula 2125 a M z 0 Geneva 0 A d efferson Fairport Harbor Pai.'Mll 0 < Pai.'Mll 115 > lk 2090 LAKE > 4e 2 Lorain 1ASH ABULAI C land River 015 2080 6 200 ria GEAUG Oberlin 0 26 CUYAHOGA 2,1 0 Wellington Medina 0 10 IR ... n", LORAIN C @@ I,- MEDINA ORTAGE SUMMIT SCALE IN MILES Fiiiiiiiiiii--c 0 5 10 15 LEGEND VICINITY MAP PLANNING ISUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER SAS N ROUP BOUNDARY SCALE IN MILES STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12 - - HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 20809 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. 0 CITIES FIGURE 2-11 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.3 14 Appendix 2 LAKE ONTARIO z NIAGARA Niag ra Fa s N Grand I and onawand@ k 8 2170 s Buff Elli@Ott C' alo C 150 2165@ 155 EastAur a Hamburg 7 Springville* Catiafa'@@' Dunkirk ERIE Fred ""j 2135 We 6 z Presque Isle 0 Salamanca Erie @ Jamestown z 0 Olean z uJ CHAUTAUQUA NEWYORK CATTARAUGUS 0- 0 PENNSYLVANIA z 0 Corry w Union City 0 (L ERIE SCALE IN MILES I S&NNZIF 0 5 10 15 20 LEGEND VICINITY MAP SCALE IN MILES PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE 100 RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES .1scols'. COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. C-D. ONTA 2135 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. 'A CITIES o- FIGURE 2-12 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 4.4 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 15 L A K E 0 N T A R 1 0 28 0 jorK State Barge Candl (3 0 Albion Rochester z 0 Medina Brockport Lewiston Lockport ORLEANS Niagara Falls 8 Creek 2310 Fairport/ Grand Tonawanda 305 Island O'Bata a MONROE 9 LIVINGSTON GENESEE Conesus ID Lake Warsaw Hemlock N take Hansa e Lo'ke -6&F- %W DansvilleO WYOMING 2230 2250 ALLEGANY 28 J VICINITY MAP SCALE IN M!LES 0 so 100 z LAKE 70 2215 CA"Al ...... Wellsville & E ONIA EWYORK PENNSYLVANIA LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. SCALE IN MILES 2320 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. pm@ CITIES 0 5 10 15 FIGURE 2-13 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.1 16 Appendix 2 Oil VVZ+@- ':7,j I, creek s Creek Os GO 0 0 3 Oswego Camden WAYNE 2425 C", wood Rome Oneida Lake Baldw-Ville Clyde 2435 Utica /0@ state P'g. Syracuse OneidaO Palmy- 0 Lyons C' 2440( ONTARIO Newark It 2 0 Canandaigua Waterloo eneca Falls A,b"r Oti c ONONDAG IA Catenov HERKIMER GeneVaO SkaL les L @k, ONEIDA @, "Hamilton Carandaigua C.y.q Ow :co L.k. L.k. La YATES Sen.. MADISON Penn Yen L.ke CAYUGA SENECA K.uka Lake SCALE IN MILES I..-I E@@ Itha a 2340 0 5 10 15 20 at ins G .an 2330 LEGEND TOMPKINS PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE SCHUYLER RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. 2425 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. CITIES VICINITY MAP ..... SCALE IN MILES FIGURE 2-14 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.2 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 17 Massena 2690 s gdensburg Potsdam Canton B'ac' 12 2650 a- Lake, v 29 01 Gouver f'q'( TupperLak 28 2625 Cranberry Lake Sf .L.AQNCE Watertown arthage Ivor Lowville v Raqueffe take LAKE F iton La as ONTARIO JEFFERSON W 252 SCALE IN MILES L 1 5 10 15 20 LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE RIVER BASIN GROUP BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES VICINITY MAP - COUNTY BOUNDARIES .... SCALE IN MILES 12-- HYDROLOGIC AREA AND NO. C-A 100 2690 HYDROLOGIC GAGING STATION AND NO. CITIES U@ ON, FIGURE 2-15 Hydrologic Gaging Stations, Planning Subarea 5.3 18 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-1 Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual Mean Period Drainage Average Discharge Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Superior West--Planning Subarea 1.1 105 Pigeon River Middle Falls, Minn. 1921-67 600 483 4,020 34 804 158 125 Poplar River 1911 114 103 651 8 150 50 Lutsen, Minn. 1912-17 1928-47 1952-61 145 Baptism River Beaver Bay, Minn. 1927-67 140 159 1,800 2 259 82 170 Embarrass River Embarrass, Minn. 1942-64 93.8 64 782 1 119 31 255 Bois Brule River Brule, Wis. 1942-67 113 169 495 104 218 133 270 Bad River 1914-22 611 605 4,190 69 917 395 Odanah, Wis. 1948-67 275 White River Ashland, Wis. 1948-67 269 291 1,020 147 426 218 300 Montreal River Saxon, Wis. 1938-67 262 325 1,790 21 487 166 Lake Superior East--Planning Subarea 1.2 320 Presque Isle River near Tula, Mich. 1945-67 261 267 1,450 30 448 120 405 Sturgeon River near 1912-15 171 204 1,320 9 307 104 Sidnaw, Mich. 1943-67 425 Otter River near Elo, Mich. 1942-67 162 212 1,210 76 289 154 430 Sturgeon River near Arnheim, Mich. 1942-67 705 807 3,930 234 1,072 520 455 Tahquamenon River near Paradise, Mich. 1953-67 790 865 4,510 201 1,281 616 Lake Michigan Northwest--Planning Subarea 2.1 580 Middle Branch Escanaba River near Ishpeming, Mich. 1954-67 128 133 745 16.1 239.1 80.7 585 East Branch Escanaba River at Gwinn, Mich. 1954-67 124 98.7 592 22.0 198.7 57.4 590 Escanaba River at 1903-12 870 896 4,330 14.1 1,385.0 493.7 Cornell, Mich. 1913-15 1950-67 595 Ford River near Hyde, Mich. 1954-67 450 341 2,480 34.8 640.0 183.3 610 Brule River near 1914-16 389 347 1,240 174.0 450.1 232.2 Florence, Wis. 1944-67 645 Pine River at Pine River Power Plant near Florence, Wis. 1923-67 528 420 2,130 74.5 657.8 210.3 660 Menominee River near Pembine, Wis. 1949-67 3,240 2,922 12,100 1,200 4,318 1,877 665 Pike River at Amberg, Wis. 1914-67 253 216 1,020 78.1 344.4 133.4 680 Peshtigo River at High Falls near Crivitz, Wis. 1912-57 554 475 1,930 60.2 708.1 256.4 695 Peshtigo River at Peshtigo, Wis. 1953-67 1,124 852 4,640 285.0 1,518 591.1 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 19 TABLE 2-1(continued) Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual mean Period Drainage Average Discharge -Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 710 Oconto River near 1906-09 678 570 3,430 158 899.8 315.5 Gillett, Wis. 1913-67 735 Fox River at Berlin, Wis. 1898-67 1,430 1,084 4,200 311 1,623 559.1 755 Wolf River above West Branch, Wolf River, Wis. 1927-62 633 569 1,890 235 840 390 770 Wolf River at Keshena Falls, Wis. 1907-67 812 753 2,530 294 1,109 510 785 Embarrass River near Embarrass, Wis. 1919-67 395 283 1,890 44.5 478.3 126.3 790 Wolf River at New London, Wis. 1896-67 2,240 1,701 9,170 429.0 2,810 865.5 800 Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wis. 1914-67 514 395 2,230 94.8 628.3 197.1 810 Waupaca River near Waupaca, Wis. 1916-66 272 236 615 ill 299 159.6 835 East Branch Fond du Lac River at Fond du Lac, Wis. 1939-54 75 32 365 0.2 58.2 5.4 860 Sheboygan River at 1916-24 432 232 2,050 11.2 402.9 47.1 Sheboygan, Wis. 1950-64 865 Cedar Creek near Cedarburg, Wis. 1930-67 121 62.7 522 1.4 159.4 13.5 870 Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Wis. 1914-67 686 384 3,550 19.4 791.6 111.6 Lake Michigan Southwest-Planning Subarea 2.2 905 Thorn Creek at Thornton, Ill. 1948-67 104 90.3 372 .12 126 69 910 Little Calumet River at South Holland, 111. 1947-67 - 158 645 18 250 72 930 Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, 111. 1947-67 125 93.6 477 6 170 34 940 Little Calumet River at Porter, Ind. 1945-67 62.9 68.6 414 20 110 35 945 Salt Creek near McCool, Ind. 1945-67 78.7 67.6 246 16 104 36 Lake Michigan Southeast-Planning Subarea 2.3 975 St. Joseph River at Three Rivers, Mich. 1953-67 1,350 919 2,830 187 1,472 365 985 Fawn River near White Pigeon, Mich. 1957-67 192 138 317 38 191 69 1015 St. Joseph River at Niles, Mich. 1930-67 3,666 3,040 13,600 828 5,718 1,464 1025 Paw Paw River at Riverside, Mich. 1951-67 390 384 1,040 158 600 270 1060 Kalamazoo River at Comstock, Mich. 1932-67 1,010 794 3,020 235 1,387 369 1085 Kalamazoo River near Fennville, Mich. 1929-67 1,600 1,301 5,000 285 2,074 737 1130 Grand River at Lansing, Mich. 1934-67 1,230 787 7,240 61 1,400 230 1190 Grand River at Grand Rapids, Mich. 1930-67 4,900 3,364 21,600 617 6,314 1,618 20 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-1(continued) Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual Mean Period Drainage Average Discharge Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Michigan Northeast-Planning Subarea 2.4 460 Black River near Garnet, Mich. 1951-67 28 26 147 6 46 16 495 Manistique River at Germfast, Mich. 1938-67 341 440 1,380 164 632 306 550 Manistique River near Blaney, Mich. 1938-67 704 820 3,580 227 1,273 499 565 Manistique River near Manistique, Mich. 1938-67 1,100 1,355 6,960 350 2,229 806 590 Escanaba River at Cornell, Mich. 1950-67 870 896 4,330 141 1,385 494 1210 Muskegon River near Merritt, Mich. 1946-67 309 221 743 27 319 136 1215 Muskegon River at Evart, Mich. 1933-67 1,450 953 3,840 316 1,424 613 1220 Muskegon River at Newaygo, Mich. 1930-67 2,350 1,907 5,840 595 2,599 1,119 1225 Pere Marquette River at Scottville, Mich. 1939-67 709 621 1,600 354 838 472 1230 Big Sable River near Freesoil, Mich. 1942-67 127 139 315 87 168 114 1235 Manistee River near Grayling, Mich. 1942-67 159 182 265 146 198 163 1240 Manistee River near Sherman, Mich. 1933-67 900 1,057 2,040 604 1,199 888 1255 Pine River near Hoxeyville, Mich. 1952-67 251 276 670 196 326 233 1260 Manistee River near Manistee, Mich. 1952-67 1,780 1,958 4,000 1,340 2,277 1,644 1270 Boardman River near Mayfield, Mich. 1952-67 223 190 383 124 229 163 Lake Huron North-Planning Subarea 3.1 1300 Cheboygan River near Cheboygan, Mich. 1942-67 865 775 1,520 260 992 602 1325 Thunder Bay River near Hillman, Mich. 1945-67 232 208 545 119 252 171 1365 Au Sable River at Mio, Mich. 1952-67 1,100 926 1,970 578 1,113 746 1385 Au Gres River near National City, Mich. 1950-67 169 94 500 12 133 28 1420 Rifle River near Sterling, Mich. 1936-67 320 302 1,160 122 384 166 Lake Huron Cent ral-P lanning Subarea 3.2 1440 Shiawassee River at Byron, Mich. 1947-67 368 238 1,380 26 431 72 1445 Shiawassee River at Owosso, Mich. 1931-67 538 308 1,950 13 591 95 1450 Shiawassee River near Fergus, Mich. 1939-67 637 394 2,560 41 688 118 1460 Farmers Creek near Lapeer, Mich. 1932-67 57 28 226 1 52 9 1485 Flint River near Flint, Mich. 1932-67 927 531 4,210 31 972 153 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 21 TABLE 2-1(continued) Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual Mean Period Drainage Average Discharge Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Mi Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Huron Central-Planning Subarea 3.2 (continued) 1500 S. Br. Cass River near Cass City, Mich. 1948-67 251 117 908 1 207 11 1505 Cass River at Cass City, Mich. 1947-67 370 190 1,500 1 340 28 1510 Cass River at Vassars Mich. 1948-67 700 371 2,270 22 662 79 1515 Cass River at Frankenmuth, Mich. 1938-67 848 447 3,530 20 788 97 1525 Tobacco River at Beaverton, Mich. 1948-67 487 358 1,360 134 467 227 1535 Salt River near N. Bradley, Mich. 1934-67 138 76 636 4 172 21 1540 Chippewa River near Mt. Pleasant 1932-67 416 288 1,400 75 423 176 1545 Chippewa River near Midland, Mich. 1947-67 597 419 1,980 101 617 229 1550 Pine River at Alma, Mich. 1930-67 288 198 1,050 34 323 98 1555 Pine River near Midland, Mich. 1948-67 390 272 1,550 37 442 150 1560 Tittabawassee River at Midland, Mich. 1936-67 2,400 1,548 8,100 225 2,289 699 1585 Pigeon River near Owendale, Mich. 1952-67 55 27 194 2 47 5 Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 1595 Black River near Fargo, Mich. 1944-67 475 271 2,340 5 512 29 1645 N. Br. Clinton River near Mount Clemens, Mich. 1947-67 199 108 790 2 208 25 1655 Clinton River at Mount Clemens, Mich. 1934-67 734 470 3,090 52 822 230 1660 River Rouge at Birmingham, Mich. 1950-67 37 14 98 1 25 5 1665 River Rouge at Detroit, Mich. 1930-67 185 104 965 6 203 26 1670 Middle River Rouge near Garden City, Mich. 1930-67 104 62 313 5 117 21 1680 Low. River Rouge at Inkster, Mich. 1947-67 83 46 294 1 99 16 1695 Huron River at Commercet Mich. 1946-67 51 35 147 6 61 15 1700 Huron River at Milford, Mich. 1948-67 125 89 389 24 150 45 1705 Huron River near New Hudson, Mich. 1948-67 143 102 379 23 169 52 1715 Ore Creek near Brighton, Mich. 1951-67 31 21 68 3 32 11 1720 Huron River near Hamburg, Mich. 1951-67 299 184 895 42 286 97 1730 Huron River near Dexter, Mich. 1946-67 506 341 1,740 62 591 142 1735 Mill Creek near Dexter, Michigan 1952-67 134 63 281 11 87 30 22 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-1(continued) Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual Mean Period Drainage Average Discharge Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 (continued) 1745 Huron River at Ann Arbor, Mich. 1948-67 711 431 2,230 74 812 186 1765 River Raisin near Monroe, Mich. 1937-67 1,034 659 4,680 4 1,374 178 Lake Erie Southwest-Planning Subarea 4.2 1805 St. Joseph River near Fort Wayne, Ind. 1941-55 1,060 967 5,820 65 1,790 396 1820 St. Marys River near Fort Wayne, Ind. 1930-67 762 543 4,900 12 1,093 174 1835 Maumee River at Antwerp, Ohio 1921-67 2,128 1,625 11,600 79 3,459 389 1960 Sandusky River near Bucyrus, Ohio 1926-67 88.8 80.4 635 1.3 128 20.4 1965 Sandusky River near Upper Sandusky, Ohio 1922-67 298 233 1,700 1.2 392 70 1970 Sandusky River near Mexico, Ohio 1924-67 774 549 4,280 8.5 970 175 1980 Sandusky River near Fremont, Ohio 1924-67 1,251 906 7,660 9.9 1,551 275 1990 Huron River at Milan, Ohio 1951-67 371 267 1,580 5.8 430 145 1995 Vermilion River near Vermilion, Ohio 1951-67 262 214 1,510 0.0 352 102 Lake Erie Central-Planning Subarea 4.3 2005 Black River at Elyria, Ohio 1945-67 396 296 1,830 2.3 470 130 2015 Rocky River near Berea, Ohio 192-S-67 267 242 1,400 1.2 418 79 2060 Cuyahoga River at Old Portage, Ohio 1922-67 404 403 1,807 47 669 181 2080 Cuyahoga River at a Independence, Ohio 1922-67 707 737 3,585 61 1,173 278 2090 Chagrin River at Willoughby, Ohio 1925-67 246 311 1,412 19 451 149 2115 Mill Cr. near Jefferson, Ohio 1942-66 82 105 481 0.0 159 65 2120 Grand River near Madison, Ohio 1923-67 581 646 3,600 2.7 1,080 323 2125 Ashtabula River near Ashtabula, Ohio 1925-67 121 146 653 0.0 210 85 2130 Conneaut Cr. at Conneaut, Ohio 1923-67 175 240 1,050 2.8 367 140 Lake Erie East-Planning Subarea 4.4 2135 Cattaraugus Cr. at Gowanda, N.Y. 1941-67 432 696 3,820 78 1,027 536 2145 Buffalo Cr. at Gardenville, N.Y. 1939-67 144 182 1,050 6.2 277 128 2150 Cayuga Cr. near Lancaster, N.Y. 1939-67 95 120 680 1.1 206 78 2155 Cazenovia Cr. at Ebenezer, N.Y. 1941-67 134 213 1,060 6.1 316 163 Hydrologic Data Collection Program 23 TABLE 2-1(continued) Flow of Selected Stations Monthly Mean Annual Mean Period Drainage Average Discharge Discharge Station of Area Discharge Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum No. 4- Stream and Station Record (sq mi) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Erie East-Planning Subarea 4.4 (continued) 2165 Little Tonawanda.Cr. at Linden, N.Y. 1913-67 22 27 196 0.2 46 17 2170 Tonawanda Cr. at Batavia, N.Y. 1945-67 ill 188 1,210 5.6 299 124 Lake Ontario West-Planning Subarea 5.1 2215 Genesee R. at Scio, N.Y. 1917-67 308 380 2,620 16 602 227 2230 Genesee R. at Portageville, N.Y. 1909-67 981 1,204 7,780 64 2,040 766 2250 Canaseraga Cr. near Dansville, N.Y. 1911-67 153 149 1,030 15 277 81 2275 Genesee River at 1909-13 1,417 1,600 10,000 83 2,641 972 Jones Bridge 1916-67 2305 Oatka Cr. at Garbutt, N.Y. 1946-67 204 187 1,070 17 315 117 2310 Black Cr. at Churchville, N.Y. 1946-67 123 98 609 1.7 177 52 2320 Genesee River at Driving Park, N.Y. 1921-67 2,457 2,682 14,300 152 4,237 1,666 Lake Ontario Central-Planning Subarea 5.2 2330 Cayuga Inlet near Ithaca, N.Y. 1938-67 37 37 248 3.0 59 15 2340 Fall Cr. near Ithaca, N.Y. 1926-67 126 179 1,040 7.1 254 84 2425 East Br. Fish Cr. at Taberg, N.Y. 1924-67 188 526 2,730 29 909 356 2435 Oneida Cr. at Oneida, N.Y. 1950-67 113 .144 596 18 209 100 2440 Chittenango Cr. near Chittenango, N.Y. 1951-67 66 106 577 14 147 66 2450 Limestone Cr. at Fayetteville, N.Y. 1941-67 86 132 599 16 202 71 Lake Ontario East-Planning Subarea 5.3 2525 Black R. near Boonville, N.Y. 1912-67 295 667 3,000 42 1,044 448 2560 Independence R. at Donnattsburg, N.Y. 1943-67 92 181 794 23 292 132 2625 West Br. Oswegatchie R. near Harrisville, N.Y. 1917-67 258 498 2,260 37 833 333 2650 Grass R. at Pyrites, N.Y. 1925-67 335 586 2,550 70 1,107 353 2690 St. Regis R. at Brasher Center, N.Y. 1911-67 616 1,018 4,530 129 1,880 581 aDoes not include discharge of Ohio Canal (approximately 64 cfs). NOTE: Runoff (inches per year) = 13.6 X @ean annual discharge (cfs) Drainage area (sq mi) Section 2 RUNOFF ANALYSIS 2.1 General concerning ground-water pumping in upper Michigan are listed in the Bibliography. Nearly all surface water runoff from tribu- tary streams in the Great Lakes Basin is supplied from precipitation falling within its 2.2 Monthly Distribution of Runoff boundaries. Only minor contributions to runoff come from municipal and industrial Monthly distribution of runoff for a rep- withdrawals of water from subsurface aqui- resentative selected hydrologic station in fers whose sources are outside the Basin. The each planning subarea is shown graphically in average annual runoff within the study area Figures 2-16 through 2-19. The graphs show is 11.6 inches or nearly 63.2 billion gallons per the maximum, average, and minimum day. The influence of the Great Lakes together monthly discharges. The upper graph repre- with bordering highlands is responsible for sents the maximum monthly flow for each of variations in areal and seasonal distribution the 12 months during the period of record, and of precipitation over the Basin. Areas on the the lower graph represents the minimum downwind side of a Lake normally receive monthly flow for each month during the period greater amounts of precipitation as snowfall of record. Table 2-2 summarizes the average in the winter than areas on the upwind side. monthly discharge, evaluated for additional The influence of the Great Lakes produces a hydrologic stations in the planning subareas. climate that is more moderate than that of The data on monthly maximum and minimum other areas at the same latitude. The wide discharges for these stations are available in variation in runoff among the planning sub- working papers filed at the office of the Great areas is primarily due to differences in geolo- Lakes Basin Commission. The distribution of gy, surfieial features, climate, and land use runoff generally reflects seasonal variations rather than to differences in annual precipita- of temperature and precipitation that produce tion. In those portions of Planning Subareas the cycle of snow aecumulation in winter and 1.1, 1.2, and 2.1 that include the Upper Penin- snowmelt runoff in spring. sula of Michigan, runoff records on several streams have been influenced by pumped mine-drainage water that would naturally be 2.3 Annual Runoff held in ground-water storage. Natural flows have also been modified by operation of stor- Average annual runoff for major United age reservoirs for hydroelectric power proj- States tributaries of the Great Lakes Basin ects. Major streams affected by augmented varies from 9 to 38 inches, with the average for flows include the upper St. Louis River in the entire Basin being 11.6 inches. Of the Minnesota, the Menominee River in Wiscon- major streams analyzed, the maximum an- sin, and the Montreal and Iron Rivers in nual runoff, 65.6 inches, occurred on East Michigan. Caution should be used when Branch Fish Creek, New York, and the analyzing past flow records on such streams in minimum annual runoff, 2.5 inches, occurred view of a reduction in mining operations in in the Maumee River basin in Ohio. Annual recent years. Although augmented flows mean runoff data for selected hydrologic sta- would have little impact on high-flow records, tions are shown in Table 2-1. This table shows drought-flow records would be significantly the average annual discharge, maximum an- affected. For example, in Iron County, Michi- nual mean discharge, and minimum annual gan, approximately 15 efs (cubic feet per sec- mean discharge for each station. The annual ond) were pumped from the mines (October runoff is dependent primarily upon precipita- 1965) and would be included in the flow at Sta- tion but is significantly influenced by temper- tion No. 610 in Table 2-1. Several references ature, vegetation, terrain, surficial features, 25 26 Appendix 2 land use, and geology. The formula for con- 2.6 Infiltration Rate and Base Streamflow verting discharge to inches of runoff is: The ability of a given soil to absorb a con- Runoff (in/yr) = 13.6 XFmeanannual discharge (cfs)] tinuous, heavy rainfall rapidly decreases until L drainage area (sq mi) J a uniform minimum rate of infiltration is reached. Infiltration rates will vary consider- ably depending on location in the Basin, geol- ogy and soil types, land use and cover, slope, and the like. At the same location, infiltration rates will change as permeability does be- 2.4 Flow Duration cause of variation in temperature of soil and rainfall, cover, intensity of rainfall, and other One of the basic hydrologic tools for analyz- antecedent conditions. Initial losses and in- ing runoff rates is the flow-duration curve. filtration rates used for hydrologic analysis This curve is a graphical expression of the per- are usually determined from reconstruction of cent of time streamflow will exceed an iden- rainfall-runoff relationships of past -storms. tified discharge. Because flow duration is a Initial losses and infiltration rates used for refinement beyond the intended scope of hydrologic analysis by the Soil Conservation framework study analysis, flow-duration data Service for upstream watersheds are based on are not included in this appendix. However, a study of the soils, land use, and treatment the U.S. Geological Survey has developed classes illustrated in its National Engineering these data as a part of the statistical summary Handbook. The major soils in the United papers for each station reported in the Water States have been classified into four groups, Supply Papers. If flow-duration data are re- A, B, C, and D, with A having the highest in- quired for detailed hydrologic studies of water filtration potential and D the lowest. Studies supply potential for power, irrigation, and in- of infiltration rate and base streamflow are dustrial or municipal-domestic use, they can important when evaluating the percentage of be obtained from the district office of the U.S. precipitation that is available for streamflow Geological Survey responsible for records of runoff, ground-water accretion, seasonal low the station being studied. flows, and drought flows. Specific studies to numerically evaluate infiltration rates for the various planning subareas are beyond the basic methodologies developed for this framework report. However, full considera- 2.5 Runoff Volumes tion should be given to infiltration losses when detailed hydrologic analysis is required. Runoff volume for hydrologic surface water Base streamflow is the relatively stable stations can be expressed as an average rate streamflow fed by ground-water sources, of flow for a specific period of time. Tables 2-1 which in turn are replenished by infiltration. and 2-2 plus Figures 2-16 through 2-19 show Base flow varies with precipitation. Base flow volume data for selected stations in each constitutes almost all streamflow during dry planning subarea in average rate of flow for a periods but only a fraction of streamflow dur- specific duration. Runoff volumes can also be ing and following floods and spring snowmelt. expressed as a cumulative running total of The smaller of the monthly average flow val- mean monthly discharge for a continuous ues shown in Table 2-2 for selected hydrologic period of record. The resulting curve, the mass stations in each planning subarea can be used runoff curve, can be used in water availability, as an indication of normal or average low base yield, and storage studies. Mass curves are flow. The minimum monthly discharge values further discussed in Section 5, Surface Water shown in Table 2-1 represent an approxima- Availability Studies. tion of minimum base flow at each station. Runoff Analysis 27 2.0 1.6 - 1.2 1.2 - .8 - .8 .4- 4 LL: 6 0 0 -E 0 0 J F M A M i i A S 0 N D YR J IF M A. M J i A S 0 N D YR. 0 BAPTISM RIVER STURGEON RIVER z NEAR BEAVER BAY, MINNESOTA NEAR SIDNAW, MICHIGAN SUBAREA 1.1 SUBAREA 1.1 L'L 2.4 LL. 0 z :3 2.0 - .4 cr 1.6 2 - .2 - .4- 0J F M A M i 'i A S 0 N D Y R, J F M A M j i A S 0 N D YR. LITTLE WOLF RIVER DEEP RIVER AT LAKE GEORGE OUTLET AT ROYALTON, WISCONSIN AT HOBART,INDIANA SUBAREA 2.1 SUBAREA 2.2 MAXIMUM GE AVERA J F M A M j J A S 0 N D Y R. GRAPH KEY FIGURE 2-16 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, and 2.2 28 Appendix 2 5 4 --- 4- 3 __r-j 2 2 LL: 0 0 0 0 J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D YR. J F M A M i i A S 0 N 07-R. 0 GRAND RIVER MUSKEGON RIVER z AT LANSING, MICHIGAN AT NEWAGO, MICHIGAN SUBAREA 2.3 SUBAREA 2.4 U. LL 0 z :) 2.0 - 4 cc 1.5 - 3 r'0 2 - .5 0 0 i F M A M J i A S 0 N D i-R. J F M A M J J A S 0 N D 'T TR AU SABLE RIVER FLINT RIVER AT MID, MICHIGAN NEAR FLINT, MICHIGAN SUBAREA 3.1 SUBAREA 3.2 MAX AVERAGE i F M A M J i A S 0 N 0 YR, GRAPH KEY FIGURE 2-17 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 2.3, 2.4, 3.1, and 3.2 Runoff Analysis 29 Q 2.0 - 10 - 1.5 6 - 1.0 4 5 2 - 0 0 0 0 j F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 YR. F M A M J i A S 0 N 0 Y R. 0 HURON RIVER MAUMEE RIVER z NEAR DEXTER, MICHIGAN AT ANTWERP, OHIO SUBAREA 4.1 SUBAREA 4.2 LA- 4.2 4.2 - 0 z 3.6 3.6 - 2,0 - 5.0 - 2.4 - 2.4 1.2 - .6 F M A M J i A S 0 N D Y R. J F M A M J J A S 0 N D Y R, GRAND RIVER CATTARAUGUS CREEK NEAR MADISON,OHIO AT GOWANDA,NEW YORK SUBAREA 4.3 SUBAREA 4.4 MAXIMUM AVERAGE FLil J F M A M J JA S 0 N D Y R. GRAPH KEY FIGURE 2-18 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 30 Appendix 2 a - 1.0- .8 4 .4 - cf) 2 - LL: .2 6 0 0 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N D YR. J IF M A M J J A S 0 N D YR 0 GENESEE RIVER FALL CREEK AT PORTAGEVILLE, NEWYORK NEAR ITHACA,NEW YORK z SUBAREA 5.1 SUBAREA 5.2 U- U- 0 z 4- 3- 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N D YR ST. REGIS RIVER AT BRASHER CENTER, NEW YORK SUBAREA 5.3 MAXIMUM AvERAGE F-i @@@A ERAGE V M IN 'MUM J IF M A M J i A S 0 N D Y R. GRAPH KEY FIGURE 2-19 Monthly Distribution of Runoff, Planning Subareas 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 Runoff Analysis 31 TABLE 2-2 Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff Station Stream and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec N. . 4- Station (Discharge in cfs) Lake Superior West-Planning Subarea 1.1 105 Pigeon River Middle Falls, Minn. 124 106 172 1,189 1,648 903 396 233 245 303 294 167 125 Poplar River Lutsen, Minn. 37 30 43 214 330 195 84 54 62 67 80 53 145 Baptism River Beaver Bay, Minn. 27 20 63 526 514 246 80 71 93 108 124 47 170 Embarrass River Embarrass, Minn. 7 5 22 191 194 114 63 32 51 45 33 14 255 Bois Brule River Brule, Wis. 129 131 148 272 246 206 171 144 150 146 151 138 270 Bad River Odanah, Wis. 168 155 529 2,182 1,240 753 555 304 323 344 429 278 275 White River Ashland, Wis. 190 193 289 623 440 323 288 234 255 213 231 205 300 Montreal River Saxon, Wis. 161 148 283 1,016 561 417 280 211 222 190 241 178 Lake Superior East-Planning Subarea 1.2 320 Presque Isle River near Tula, Mich. 99 89 158 956 585 307 211 142 154 171 207 142 405 Sturgeon River near Sidnaw, Mich. 65 54 132 757 490 232 130 77 110 129 158 104 425 Otter River near Elo, Mich. ill 105 195 793 382 195 126 110 ill 129 162 132 430 Sturgeon River near Arnheim, Mich. 402 366 642 2,575 1,636 858 582 419 427 534 629 498 455 Tahquamenon River near Paradise, Mich. 455 438 548 2,633 1,858 614 466 318 554 748 962 786 Lake Michigan Northwest-Planning Subarea 2.1 580 Middle Branch Escanaba River near Ishpeming, Mich. 55 44 64 456 307 139 88 64 78 102 116 81 585 East Branch Escanaba River at Gwinn, Mich. 46 39 58 347 202 103 69 48 54 73 85 64 590 Escanaba River at Cornell, Mich. 344 302 482 2,691 1,662 891 677 548 576 582 700 497 595 Ford River near Hyde, Mich. ill 79 166 1,219 930 347 182 125 208 246 302 176 610 Brule River near Florence, Wis. 235 225 287 650 525 406 369 289 304 296 318 260 645 Pine River at Pine River Powerplant 209 188 296 929 816 548 381 309 371 364 382 249 near Florence, Wis. 660 Menominee River near Fembine, Wis. 1,957 1,855 2,208 5,551 5,461 3,441 2,987 2,201 2,321 2,308 2,324 2,016 665 Pike River at Amberg, Wis. 133 123 218 467 342 265 176 154 169 179 210 160 680 Peshtigo River at High Falls near Crivitz, Wis. 261 269 471 983 799 669 422 345 387 366 420 308 695 Peahtigo River at Peshtigo, Wis. 480 449 847 1,934 1,588 950 635 581 736 679 760 577 710 Oconto River near Gillett, Wis. 346 330 632 1,240 871 666 459 378 443 -471 540 419 735 Fox River at Berlin, Wis. 674 734 1,746 2,190 1,395 1,129 822 747 832 915 1,007 822 755 Wolf River above West Branch, Wolf River, Wis. 390 373 540 1,030 854 678 511 433 508 522 560 432 770 Wolf River at Keshena Falls, Wis. 507 483 683 1,342 1,124 916 687 608 694 700 736 583 785 Embarrass River near Embarrass, Wis. 142 135 389 725 417 343 200 162 225 224 260 172 790 Wolf River at New London, Wis. 954 888 2,071 4,132 2,758 2,169 1,374 1,060 1,283 1,359 1,558 1,155 800 Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wis. 218 227 621 879 531 467 286 259 317 312 355 267 32 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-2(continued) Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff Station Stream and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec o. 4- Station (Discharye in cfs) Lake Michigan Northwest-Planning Subarea 2.1 (continued) 810 Waupaca River near Waupaca, Wis. 191 196 388 337 258 245- 207 204 214 214 230 202 835 East Branch Fond du Lac River at Fond du Lac, Wis. 15 21 139 75 24 44 13 11 8 9 14 10 860 Sheboygan River at Sheboygan, Wis. 88 127 678 745 288 147 86 119 105 128 156 116 865 Cedar Creek near Cedarburg, Wis. 43 53 183 144 73 59 35 16 37 36 41 32 870 Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Wis. 231 381 1,043 873 451 322 174 174 206 228 286 242 Lake Michigan Southwest-Planning Subarea 2.2 905 Thorn Creek at Thornton, Ill. 90 Ill 153 177 114 89 67 40 54 56 53 66 910 Little Calumet River at South Holland, Ill. 156 208 302 294 219 137 114 62 82 92 89 110 930 Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ill. 96 128 190 185 133 73 58 32 39 57 55 78 940 Little Calumet River at Porter, Ind. 73 87 114 116 80 59 41 35 38 61 54 67 945 Salt Creek near McCool, Ind. 73 89 ill 114 76 60 45 36 38 56 53 62 Lake Michigan Southeast-Planning Subarea 2.3 975 St. Joseph River at Three Rivers, Mich. 879 1,024 1,666 1,762 1,382 826 575 460 443 543 668 806 985 Fawn River near White Pigeon, Mich. 133 152 213 229 194 125 98 92 87 94 114 133 1015 St. Joseph River at Niles, Mich. 3,111 3,506 4,765 5,106 4,235 3,052 2,283 1,901 1,792 2,020 2,278 2,527 1025 Paw Paw River at Riverside, Mich. 425 456 616 561 459 322 248 223 225 316 361 407 1060 Kalamazoo River at Comstock, Mich. 795 872 1,262 1,247 1,014 810 592 495 495 578 669 711 1085 Kalamazoo River near Fennville, Mich. 1,390 1,473 2,019 1,949 1,632 1,272 908 815 838 958 1,144 1,233 1130 Grand River at Lansing, Mich. 687 905 1,879 1,668 1,121 819 435 288 283 374 458 546 1190 Grand River at Grind Rapids, Mich. 3,188 3,901 7,391 6,636 4,560 3,145 1,868 1,437 1,600 1,864 2.248 2,585 Lake Michigan Northeast-Planning Subarea 2.4 460 Black River near Garnet, Mich. 15 13 18 84 45 21 16 12 16 23 29 23 495 Manistique River at Germifast, Mich. 380 353 414 808 651 446 330 258 322 412 478 433 550 Manistique River near Blaney, Mich. 621 558 778 2,125 1,319 774 524 375 463 671 872 766 565 Manistique River near Manistique, Mich. 946 818 lo206 3,810 2,396 1,302 852 597 709 1,031 1,397 1,203 590 Escanaba River at Cornell, Mich. 344 302 482 2,691 1,662 891 677 548 576 582 700 497 1210 Muskegon River near Merritt, Mich. 188 183 255 520 371 225 161 112 114 145- 184 197 1215 Muskegon River at Evart, Mich. 796 815 1,437 2,165 1,340 972 664 499 527 666 852 847 1220 Muskegon River at Newaygo, Mich. 1,791 1,933 2,886 3,315 2,429 1,870 1,357 1,150 1,214 1,431 1,762 1.765 1225 Pere Marquette River at Scottville, Mich. 616 608 829 947 734 610 475 433 461 513 607 626 1230 Big Sable River near Freesoil, Mich. 135 137 178 204 160 135 112 103 110 116 136 138 1235 Manistee River near Grayling, Mich. 172 171 182 218 193 185 176 170 175 179 185 178 Runoff Analysis 33 TABLE 2-2(continued) Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff Station Stream and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec No . 4- Station (Discharge in cfs) Lake Michigan Northeast-Planning Subarea 2.4 (continued) 1240 Manistee River near Sherman, Mich. 983 979 1,155 1,490 1,156 1,033 916 856 883 936 1,017 1,007 1255 Pine River near Hoxeyville, Mich. 240 250 328 420 306 264 231 236 235 254 277 267 1260 Manistee River near Manistee, Mich. 1,836 1,841 2,191 2,953 2,197 1,897 1,694 1,591 1,641 1,782 1,933 1,946 1270 Boardman River near Mayfield, Mich. 167 166 197 286 223 193 174 159 168 174 186 185 Lake Huron Nortb-Planning Subarea 3.1 1300 Cheboygan River near Cheboygan, Mich. 812 Soo 860 1,072 1,047 815 649 551 597 616 718 770 1325 Thunder Bay River near Hillman, Mich. 185 178 241 372 260 201 170 152 165 177 202 196 1365 An Sable River at Mio, Mich. 819 806 957 1,410 1,129 950 827 772 800 850 904 887 1385 An Gres River near National City, Mich. 58 73 205 280 145 70 35 27 31 52 68 81 1420 Rifle River near Sterling, Mich. 244 280 550 627 387 281 183 165 176 212 259 265 Lake Huron Central-Planning Area 3.2 1440 Shiawassee River at Byron, Mich@ 234 316 540 485 346 173 115 82 78 124 161 210 1445 Shiawassee River at Owosso, Mich. 296 413 697 645 461 244 127 93 102 133 184 238 1450 Shiawassee River near Fergus, Mich. 388 519 985 843 624 323 178 116 126 175 238 310 1460 Farmers Creek near Lapeer, Mich. 25 37 71 64 42 23 9 8 9 11 16 21 1485 Flint River near Flint, Mich. 470 687 1,392 1,208 750 420 199 180 193 212 289 378 1500 S. Br. Cass River near Cass City, Mich. 100 162 438 308 131 57 44 21 10 15 37 85 1505 Cass River at Cass City, Mich. 174 255 720 500 218 82 61 30 15 24 70 132 1510 Cass River at Vassar, Mich. 333 494 1,199 967 469 194 139 85 59 76 173 277 1515 Cass River at Frankenmuth, Mich. 393 549 1,515 1,071 630 334 153 92 80 121 216 306 1525 Tobacco River at Beaverton, Mich. 290 344 672 746 423 284 260 198 212 255 300 316 1535 Salt River near N. Bradley, Mich. 53 99 274 178 87 52 31 13 17 26 40 49 1540 Chippewa River near Mt. Pleasant 260 321 565 564 354 250 175 147 166 197 248 257 1545 Chippewa River near Midland, Mich. 325 412 877 997 557 318 258 185 188 234 326 361 1550 Pine River at Alma, Mich. 176 221 437 403 257 158 94 80 96 121 166 172 1555 Pine River near Midland, Mich. 234 334 589 62o 333 193 137 113 127 151 200 234 1560 Tittabawassee River at Midland, Mich. 1,147 1,534 3,612 3,496 1,983 1,205 660 460 546 748 1,087 1,132 1585 Pigeon River near Owendale, Mich. 16 30 103 63 35 17 8 5 4 8 13 23 Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 1595 Black River near Fargo, Mich. 244 395 993 646 325 170 70 61 27 66 82 181 1645 N. Br. Clinton River near Mount Clemens, Mich. ill 180 322 260 140 45 21 13 15 30 54 106 1655 Clinton River at Mount Clemens, Mich. 458 686 1,050 1,000 689 404 218 161 157 197 252 385 1660 River Rouge at Birmingham, Mich. 12 17 33 30 20 10 6 4 3 6 9 13 34 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-2(continued) Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff Station Stream and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec No. 4- Station (Discharge in qfs) Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 (continued) 1665 River Rouge at Detroit, Mich. 105 160 223 230 168 80 40 32 26 41 57 88 1670 Middle River Rouge near Garden City, Mich. 70 92 137 128 89 42 28 22 20 28 37 58 1680 Lower River Rouge at Inkster, Mich. 56 87 126 108 49 22 12 9 8 14 23 46 1695 Huron River at Commerce, Mich. 36 39 60 71 53 31 20 15 18 20 26 33 1700 Huron River at Milford, Mich. 92 103 147 161 115 75 56- 45 51 62 75 88 1705 Huron River near New Hudson, Mich. 109 120 157 141 122 86 61 54 61 76 122 115 1715 Ore Creek near Brighton, Mich. 20 22 39 41 30 19 13 10 9 15 18 20 1720 Huron River near Hamburg, Mich. 181 193 315 296 257 162 119 99 95 126 187 180 1730 Huron River near Dexter, Mich. 341 376 606 688 501 297 180 137 163 198 282 323 1735 Mill Creek near Dexter, Mich. 52 73 155 135 79 47 26 21 20 35 46 63 1745 Huron River at Ann Arbor, Mich. 469 549 841 853 592 337 220 162 179 249 355 421 1765 River Raisin near Monroe, Mich. 730 963 1,600 1,391 960 482 276 149 143 225 376 504 Lake Erie Southwest-Planning Subarea 4.2 1805 St. Joseph River near Fort Wayne, Ind. 1,475 1,584 2,103 1,986 1,508 640 447 253 194 354 436 657 1820 St. Mary's River near-Fort Wayne, Ind. 933 951 1,329 1,163 701 423 252 141 73 138 220 466 1835 Maumee River at Antwerp, Ohio 2.327 2,432 3,619 3,339 2,225 1,123 694 418 405 528 869 1,565 1960 Sandusky River near Bucyrus, Ohio 148 144 175 125 79 61 34 14 14 28 51 92 1965 Sandusky River near Upper Sandusky, Ohio 412 433 562 427 239 16� 89 42 42 53 112 231 1970 Sandusky River near Mexico, Ohio 974 1,010 1,376 1,016 533 414 208 104 ill 118 237 519 1980 Sandusky River near Fremont, Ohio 1,601 1,703 2,270 1,714 938 669 317 161 172 186 366 828 1990 Huron River at Milan, Ohio 402 498 719 573 296 150 107 61 23 32 129 232 1995 Vermilion River near Vermilion, Ohio 325 418 620 482 239 81 67 41 11 14 82 196 Lake Erie Central-Planning Subarea 4.3 2005 Black River at Elyria, Ohio 492 557 799 645 346 200 69 61 32 31 100 231 2015 Rocky River near Berea, Ohio 398 456 580 504 249 122 63 54 48 78 129 235 2060 Cuyahoga River at Old Portage, Ohio 561 617 877 733 466 273 200 158 157 183 250 373 2080 Cuyahoga River at Independence, Ohio 1,098 1,172 1,620 1,427 880 506 331 260 191 264 415 678 2090 Chagrin River at Willoughby, Ohio 473 514 691 562 338 194 96 86 78 141 233 337 2115 Mill Cr. near Jefferson, Ohio 175 206 259 177 113 43 18 22 17 33 77 139 2120 Grand River near Madison. Ohio 1,096 1,251 1,618 1,162 665 252 126 113 144 217 385 754 2125 Ashtabula River near Ashtabula. Ohio 234 256 332 245 148 56 20 23 30 68 121 223 2130 Conneaut Cr. at Conneaut, Ohio 424 412 518 381 229 71 38 47 69 104 215 382 Runoff Analysis 35 TABLE 2-2(continued) Average Monthly Distribution of Runoff Station Stream and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec No. 4_ Station (Discharge in cfs) Lake Erie East-Planning Subarea 4.4 2135 Cattaraugus Cr. at Gowanda, N.Y. 839 895 1,684 1,502 748 431 232 180 222 281 515 840 2145 Buffalo Cr. at Gardenville, N.Y. 234 282 509 403 170 81 33 29 37 58 130 229 2150 Cayuga Cr. near Lancaster, N.Y. 157 203 351 268 104 39 14 16 20 36 86 152 2155 Cazenovia Cr. at Ebenezer, N.Y. 290 325 572 437 197 86 32 31 42 75 176 293 2165 Little Tonawanda Cr. at Linden, N.Y. 36 40 84 66 28 13 4 3 3 7 13 25 2170 Tonawanda Cr. at Batavia, N.Y. 238 290 569 474 195 75 38 29 31 52 89 189 Lake Ontario West-Planning Subarea 5.1 2215 Genesee R. at Scio, N.Y. 398 402 931 898 525 253 158 98 99 148 303 349 2230 Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y. 1,407 1,366 3,006 2,837 1,532 758 404 290 330 501 910 1,130 2250 Canaseraga Cr. near Dansville, N.Y. 146 166 388 364 200 ill 66 40 42 55 94 123 2275 Genesee River at Jones Bridge 1,857 1,759 4,101 3,655 2,127 1,058 563 375 383 698 1,206 1,436 2305 Oatka Cr. at Garbutt, N.Y. 189 257 558 521 237 106 55 39 33 51 62 138 2310 Black Cr. at Churchville, N.Y. 99 164 330 252 116 45 19 11 10 25 34 70 2320 Genesee River at Driving Park, N.Y. 2,641 3,078 6,191 6,132 3,572 1,962 1,191 966 940 1,222 1,883 2,450 Lake Ontario Central-Planning Subarea 5.2 2330 Cayuga Inlet near Ithaca, N.Y. 34 44 97 85 52 25 12 97 9 18 25 34 2340 Fall Cr. near Ithaca, N.Y. 186 195 440 413 214 114 70 48 54 84 150 182 2425 East Br. Fish Cr. at Taberg, N.Y. 490 396 828 1,673 674 256 169 135 209 364 576 555 2435 Oneida Cr. at Oneida, N.Y. 180 199 364 324 149 76 55 47 39 49 97 149 2440 Chittenango Cr. near Chittenango, N.Y. 122 144 235 252 ill 63 41 37 32 38 79 116 2450 Limestone Cr. at Fayetteville. N.Y. 152 176 324 267 150 90 52 44 45 58 91 138 Lake Ontario East-Planning Subarea 5.3 2525 Black River near Boonville, N.Y. 627 531 972 1,880 934 455 320 239 300 441 645 671 2560 Independence River at Donnattsburg, N.Y. 155 144 270 529 247 118 81 57 79 123 192 177 2625 West Er. Oswegatchie River near Harrisville, N.Y. 481 399 838 1,364 666 330 206 149 176 338 509 521 2650 Grass River at Pyrites, N.Y. 521 458 920 1,627 836 424 268 222 250 399 563 545 2690 St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y. 860 707 1,494 2,881 1,544 831 520 418 464 692 919 894 Section 3 FLOOD CHARACTERISTICS 3.1 General equaled or exceeded rather than the fre- quency of an exact value of stage or discharge. Because available streamflow records on Such estimates are properly designated as ex- most of the tributaries to the Great Lakes ceedence frequency but in practice are usually cover relatively short periods, a reliable pic- referred to simply as frequency. Frequency ture of flood potential cannot always be ob- is usually expressed in units of percent, such tained from an examination of streamflow as the 2-percent flood peak, which means the records alone. Therefore, any investigation of flood peak that would have a 2-percent chance flooding should include a thorough search of of being equaled or exceeded in any one year. historical records contained in newspaper The annual peak frequency data developed files, public libraries, historical society li- for this appendix were baged on the log Pear- braries, and other sources. Because the flood son Type III statistical procedure with zero data contained in this section are derived en- skew coefficient. Extremely high or low dis- tirely from streamflow records, they may be charge events, considered atypical of the somewhat misleading. Flooding by rivers in period of record, were adjusted prior to use in the Basin is most often caused by high- the computations. The expected probability intensity rainstorms or by a combination of adjustment was not applied to the computed snowmelt and rainfall on partially frozen percentage values. The Water Resources ground. Although flooding can be experienced Council, Bulletin 15, recommends that the log in almost any month of the year, it is most Pearson Type III procedure be used as a uni- common in late winter or early spring and is form technique for determining flood-flow generally associated with snowmelt. Flood frequencies. A regionalized study of several stages are frequently increased by ice jams, shorter-term stations would lead to a re- especially at the mouth of a river, where its gionalized skew coefficient with sufficient re- capacity can be restricted by either sheet ice liability to use in the place of zero skew. How- or windblown ice from the lake. The mag- ever, a regionalized study of skew coefficients nitude and number of flood occurrences in the has not been made and is beyond the scope of Great Lakes Basin are discussed in detail in this report. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper Table 2-3 includes, for selected hydrologic 1677.8 Appendix 14, Flood Plains, discusses stations in each planning subarea, the existing and projected flood damage potential maximum instantaneous recorded flow with within the Basin in depth. its frequency in percent; the discharge mag- nitude for the 2-year, 50-year, and 100-year floods; the maximum gage height of record; 3.2 Annual Peak Flood Frequencies and the mean sea level elevation of zero on the gage. Frequency curves for all studies listed in Floods are random occurrences dependent Table 2-3 can be reconstructed by plotting the on a combination of natural climatological fac- 2-,50-, and 100-year values shown and drawing tors and channel conditions, and there is no a straight line through the points. method of accurately predicting the time of Figures 2-20 through 2-34 are annual peak occurrence or magnitude of any future flood discharge-frequency curves developed for event. However, an analysis of past flood selected hydrologic stations considered typi- events can give an indication of probability of cal of each planning subarea. Curves and occurrence of a given stage or discharge. In statistical data developed for the other hy- connection with flood damages and flood- drologic stations are available in the office of control planning, it is customary to estimate the Great Lakes Basin Commission. Where the frequency (or probability) with which possible, the selected hydrologic stations; rep- specific flood stages or discharges may be resent runoff conditions free from artificial 37 38 Appendix 2 control or regulation. Each figure shows a re- between partial duration and annual peaks lationship that can be used to transfer the curves, developed by Walter Langbein, can be discharge-frequency data from the station used. Langbein's relationship was first pre- with a given drainage area to a second location sented in 1949.1 having the same hydrologic regimen and a like-numbered hydrologic area, but with a dif- ferent drainage area. The new frequency 3.4 Alternative Frequency Methodologies curve would be established by multiplying the known discharge values from the given fre- The basic frequency data for this appendix quency curve for selected frequencies by the were developed in accordance with the method factor interpolated from the table. Caution in papers by Leo R. Beard.2 This procedure is must be used, however, when extrapolating based upon the log Pearson Type III distribu- values for drainage areas smaller or larger tion. Although this procedure is standard with than the areas shown in the table. The degree the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it offers a of accuracy becomes questionable beyond somewhat different approach for determining these limits. The factors shown in the rela- frequencies than those used by other agen- tionship were developed from data shown in cies. The resulting differences can be signifi- Figures 2, 3, and 4 of U.S. Geological Survey cant when considering localized cases, but Water Supply Paper 1677.9 These data can be using one procedure instead of another would generally used to determine peak discharge- have little impact on framework-scope study frequency curves for ungaged areas. It must results. Methodologies of other agencies are be stressed that curves derived in this manner summarized in the following paragraphs to should be used for preliminary planning pur- indicate potential differences from the base. poses only and that design of specific projects approach used in this report. must be based on a detailed study of the The U.S. Geological Survey and the Soil specific area. Some areas within the Basin Conservation Service also use the log Pearson have already been studied in greater detail Type III distribution for computing frequency than required for this report. Frequency data curves when stream records are available. developed in these studies would be excep- This method is described in the Water Re- tions to the generalized curves developed for sources Council Bulletin 15.10 These agencies this appendix. Basins in which these more ad- generally utilize a skew coefficient developed vanced studies have been conducted are listed from the recorded data of the hydrologic sta- in Subsection 3.6. tion being studied. The resulting curve, when compared with a frequency curve developed by Beard's method, usually differs in the 3.3 Partial Duration Flood Frequencies upper extremes, or the area representing less frequent flood events. Differences can also Nearly every steam has more than one peak occur because of normal Corps of Engineers during any given year. Secondary peaks for practice to adjust extreme high or low dis- some years may be substantially higher than charge events to be more in line with other the maximum peaks of other years. Therefore, observed data. The Corps of Engineers a curve based on all peaks, instead of just the method also places less reliance on data ob- annual maximums, would be less sloped at the tained from stations having short periods of lower end because many of the smaller annual record, and often correlates the shorter maximum peaks would have been eliminated periods of record with data obtained from from consideration. A curve based on all peaks other stations in the area. above a certain base, regardless of the number Methods used by the Soil Conservation Ser- of peaks occurring in a year, is a partial dura- vice to estimate the frequency of events such tion curve. Frequency curves developed in as flood peaks are found in that agency's Na- this manner provide a more realistic evalua- tional Engineering Handbook (NEH) 4, Hy- tion of flood damages in cases where damage drology.9 Frequency analyses of peak discharge potential remains high regardless of the and runoff volume data are also accomplished number of flood occurrences within a given by means of a computer program prepared by year. the Central Technical Unit of the Soil Conser- In the event that secondary peak data are vation Service, Washington, D.C. This pro- not available or that only preliminary infor- gram utilizes primarily the two-parameter mation is needed, the empirical relationship gamma distribution for computing the 0- to 99- Flood Characteristics 39 percent chance events and the log-normal dis- through 2-19. Monthly runoff in acre-feet is tribution whenever the gamma statistic is computed by multiplying monthly average greater than 51. discharge in cubic feet per second by 60. The Soil Conservation Service when analyz- ing runoff from small ungaged watersheds de- termines discharge frequency based on obm 3.6 Exceptions and Special Cases served rainfall-runoff data. Rainfall- frequency relationships for different dura- Hydrological studies for several river basins tions are obtained from data in Technical have been completed with greater accuracy Paper No. 40,8 prepared for the Soil Conserva- than evaluations in this appendix. Where tion Service by the Weather Bureau, now the these data are available, they should be used National Weather Service. Frequency curves in preference to data in this appendix. These developed by these methods generally result river basins include the Bad River, Wisconsin, in curves with a flatter slope than curves de- in Planning Subarea 1.1; Sturgeon River, veloped by the base method using zero skew. Michigan, in Planning Subarea 1.2; Kalamazoo and Grand Rivers, Michigan, in Planning Subarea 2.3; Little Calumet River, 3.5 Flood Volumes Indiana, in Planning Subarea 2.2; Saginaw River, Michigan, in Planning Subarea 3.2; A knowledge of flood volume is necessary River Rouge, Michigan, in Planning Subarea when determining the effectiveness of sizes of 4.1; Genesee River basin in Planning Sub- storage reservoirs needed to control flooding. area 5.1; Oswego River basin in Planning Relationships between flood volume, dura- Subarea 5.2; and others. Further information tion, and frequency can be developed using on these completed studies is contained in the procedures similar to those described for flood Bibliography of this appendix. peak frequency in this chapter of the appen- Rivers in the Basin known to be controlled dix. Flood volume-duration-frequency data and regulated by storage reservoirs and also were not developed for this appendix. How- augmented by flows from mining operations ever, basic data needed for these studies are should be analyzed as special cases and not by available in the statistical summary papers using the generalized data of this appendix. computed by the District offices of the U.S. These rivers include the St. Louis River in Geological Survey for streamflow stations in- PSA 1.1; the Montreal River in PSAS 1.1 and cluded in their reporting network. A rough 1.2; the Ontonagon River in PSA 1.2; the estimate of expected flood volumes based on Menominee River in PSA 2.1; the Thunder peak monthly flows for the selected hydrologic Bay River in PSA 3.1; the Flint and Tit- stations in each planning subarea can be ob- tabawassee Rivers in PSA 3.2; and the Black tained from the maximum monthly discharge River in PSA 5.3. data contained in Table 2-1 or Figures 2-16 40 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-3 Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-yea@_ of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (Cfs) (% prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Superior West--Planning Subarea 1.1 105 Pigeon River 11,000 3.4 4,550 12,330 14,000 7.6 789.58 a Middle Falls, Minn. 125 Poplar River 1,880 2.8 820 2,000 2,250 6.23 697.89 Lutsen, Minn. b 145 Baptism River 9,350 1 2,400 7,900 9,350 8.11 609.97 Beaver Bay, Minn. 170 Embarrass River 1,740 5 610 2,250 2,650 10.92 1410.36 Embarrass, Minn. 255 Bois Brule River 1,520 4 680 1,750 1,975 5.2 948.49 Brule, Wis. 270 Bad River 27,700 0.6 8,200 22,000 25,000 21.7 668.3 odanah, Wis. 275 White River 6,270 5 2,700 7,800 9,000 7.90 660.15 Ashland, Wis. 300 Montreal River 6,600 4 3,500 7,400 8,200 7.50 760 Saxon, Wis. Lake Superior East--Planning Subarea 1.2 320 Presque Isle River 4,640 4.9 2,420 5,400 6,000 14.04 1299.66 Near Tula, Mich. 1214.40 a 405 Sturgeon River 4,630 3.7 2,290 5,150 5,725 11.63 Near Sidnaw, Mich. .0a 425 Otter River 4,540 10.0 2,710 6,175 6,880 13.52 630 Near Elo, Mich. 430 Sturgeon River 15,500 1.95 6,000 14,900 16,850 14.57 605.98 Near Arnheim, Mich. 455 Tahquamenon River 6,990 3.4 4,200 7,400 8,000 10.26 697.0 Near Paradise, Mich. Lake Michigan Northwest--Planning Subarea 2.1 590 Escanaba River 10,500 5 6,050 12,200 13,250 4.90 749.26' at Cornell, Mich. 610 Brule River 4,700 o.6 1,530 3,800 4,300 6.57 1210.0 Near Florence, Wis. 645 Pine River at Pine River 4,380 1.2 1,900 4,075 4,500 - - Power Plant Near Florence, Wis. 660 Menominee River 26,900 6.5 13,400 34,100 38,500 13.90 745.0 Near Pembine, Wis. a 665 Pike River at 2,800 0,4 1,100 2,200 2,450 7.8 865 Amberg, Wis. .0a 680 Peshtigo River at High 3,670 2.8 2,000 3,800 4,150 - 810 Falls Near Crivitz, Wis. 695 Peshtigo River at 9,790 O@95 4,300 8,700 9,550 11.59 584.64 Peshtigo, Wis. .0a 710 Oconto River at 8,400 0.4 2,500 '6,400 7,200 11.2 735 Gillett, Wis. a 735 Fox River at Berlin, Wis. 6,900 4 3,425 7,800 8,750 15.5 744.52 755 Wolf River Above West 3,120 0.5 1,760 2,790 2,940 6.60 856.57 Branch Wolf River, Wis. a 770 Wolf River at Keshena 4,830 0.75 2,400 4,325 4,700 9.67 820.0 Falls, Wis. 785 Embarrass River 7,080 1.39 2,270 6,550 7,550 12.13 800.0' Near Embarrass, Wis. 790 Wolf River at New 15,500 2.0 6,200 15,500 17,900 11.4 749.37 London, Wis. a 800 Little Wolf River at 6,950 6.1 3,090 9t6OO 11,200 8.0 774.0 Royalton, Wis. a 810 Waupaca River 2,520 4.0 1,050 2,990 3,400 6.90 780.0 Near,Waupaca, Wis. Flood Characteristics 41 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (% prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Michigan Northwest--Planning Subarea 2.1 (continued) 835 East Branch Fond du Lac 2,140 10.5 790 4,200 5,210 5.87 762.82 River at Fond du Lac, Wis. 860 Sheboygan River at 7,140 11.3 2,890 13,300 16,500 9.40 584.00 a Sheboygan, Wis. 865 Cedar Creek Near 3,600 6.0 960 5,500 6,975 12.25 795.33 Cedarburg, Wis. Lake Michigan Southwest--Planning Subarea 2.2 905 Thorn Creek at 4,700 4.8 1,925 5,800 6,750 16.0 586.43 Thornton, Ill. 910 Little Calumet River at 4,440 7.1 2,350 5,700 6,450 20.11 575.00 South Holland, Ill. 930 Deep River at Lake 3,880 2.7 1,300 4,190 4,875 19.48 588.17 a George Outlet at Hobart, Ind. 940 Little Calumet River 3,110 3.3 1,035 3,540 4,175 11.66 603.48 at Porter, Ind. 945 Salt Creek at 3,180 1.6 880 3oOOO 3,525 14.12 594.10 McCool, Ind. Lake Michigan Southeast--Planning Subarea 2.3 975 St. Joseph River at 4,200 15 3,050 5,700 6,200 7.78 781.34 Three Rivers, Mich. 990 St. Joseph River at 10,700 0.6 4,650 9,300 10,200 6.56 755.50 Mottville, Mich. 995 Pigeon Creek at 744 3.5 320 830 940 14.95 940.00 Hogback L. Near Angola, Ind. 1002.2 N. Br. Elkhart River 717 11 410 1,025 1,150 8.78 880 Near Cosperville, Mich. 1005 Elkhart River at 5,440 6.3 2,520 7,100 8,200 10.15 769.43 Goshen, Ind. 1010 St. Joseph River at 18,400 1.6 8,800 17,800 19,700 27.82 700 Elkhart, Ind. 1015 St. Joseph River at 20,200 1.8 9,400 20,000 22,200 13.10 635.02 Niles, Mich. 1025 Paw Paw River at 1,650 7 1,150 1,900 2,020 8.98 588.80 Riverside, Mich. 1035 Kalamazoo River at 2,130 1.7 930 2,100 2,320 8.20 877.09 Marshall, Mich. 1050 Battle Creek at 3,640 1.9 1,190 3,600 4,150 4.48 823.24 Battle Creek, Mich. 1055 Kalamazoo River 7,290 0.7 2,400 6,000 6,900 9.13 815 Near Battle Creek, Mich. 1060 Kalamazoo River at 6,910 1.10 2,700 6,300 79000 7.94 759.12 Comstock, Mich. 1085 Kalamazoo River Near 17,500 6.5 14,300 19,100 20,000 606.76 586.51 Fennville, Mich. 1090 Grand River at 1,070 1.9 620 1,060 1,140 13.50 900.00 Jackson, Mich. 1110 Grand River Near Eaton 3,360 12 1,900 5,100 5,800 7.65 852.68 Rapids, Mich. 1125 Red Cedar River at 5,920 3.8 1,960 6,900 8,200 11.58 824.39 East Lansing, Mich. 1130 Grand River at 24,500 0.3 5,200 16,500 19,000 18.60 805.53 Lansing, Mich. 42 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (% prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Michigan Southeast--Planning Subarea 2.3 (continued) 1140 Grand River at 9,100 5.5 4,400 11,200 12,700 11.56 705.00 Portland, Mich. 1145 Looking Glass River 2,860 4.9 1,030 3,600 4,250 7.70 747.09 Near Eagle, Mich. 1150 Maple River at 6,500 5.3 1,890 9,000 11,200 11.22 642.58 Maple Rapids, Mich. 1160 Grand River at 21,500 7 9,500 29,500 4,500 2-3.43 615.38 Ionia, Mich. 1165 Flat River at Smyrna, 3,100 11 1,500 3,100 3,450 7.27 729.53 Mich. 1175 Thornapple River 6,810 2.25 1,980 7,000 8,100 10.20 786.71 Near Hastings, Mich. 1180 Thornapple River 60290 4.70 2,550 8,000 9,400 10.79 676.31 Near Caledonia, Mich. 1185 Rogue River 2,640 3 1,280 2,830 3,150 8.59 625.2 Near Rockford, Mich. 1190 Grand River at 54,000 1.6 17,500 52,000 60,000 19.5 585.70 Grand Rapids, Mich. Lake Michigan Northeast--Planning Subarea 2.4 460 Black River 860 0.7 250 700 800 8.55 629.7 Near Garnet, Mich. 550 Manistique River 9,300 0.6. 3,500 7,800 8,650 19..42 612.55 Near Blaney, Mich. 565 Manistique River 16,900 1 6,250 15,000 16,800 12.85 608 Near Manistique, Mich. 590 Escanaba River at 8,340 18 6,100 12,200 13,300 4.52 749.26 Cornell, Mich. 1210 Muskegon River 1,340 4 765 1,450 1,600 8.16 1,117.82 Near Merritt, Mich. 1215 Muskegon River at 7,750 4 4,100 6,800 9,500 14.42 977.72 Evart, Mich 1220 Muskegon Riv;r at 14,950 0.4 5,850 12,000 13,200 5.31 625.83 Newago, Mich. 1225 Pere Marquette River 2,740 6 1,620 3,300 3,650 5.84 597.66 Scottsville, Mich. 1230 Big Sable River 555 5 340 640 685 3.4 615.32 Near Freesoil, Mich. 1235 Manistee River 388 2 295 390 405 1.88 1,120.64 Near Grayling, Mich. 1240 Manistee River 3,570 1 2,330 3,430 3,600 7.1 804 Near Sherman, Mich. 1255 Pine River Near 2,440 0.8 1,000 2,100 2,350 6.82 775 Hoxeyvilles Mich. 1260 Manistee River 6,800 11 4,900 8o400 9,000 8.16 585 Near Manistee, Mich. 1270 Boardman River 1,220 2 640 1,230 1,350 6.90 760 Near Mayfield, Mich. Lake Huron North'-Planning Subarea 3.1 1280 Sturgeon River Near 1,180 2.5 650 1,230 1,340 4.48 740 Wolverine, Mich. 1285 Indian River at 1,140 4 840 1,200 1,250 5.58 590.21 Indian River, Mich. 1290 Pigeon River Near 1,500 1.8 450 1,480 1,710 6.80 886.24 Vanderbilt, Mich. Flood Characteristics 43 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Huron North--Planning Subarea 3.1 (continued) 1295 Pigeon River at 1,170 4 645 1,310 1,450 6.80 675 Afton, Mich. 1300 Cheboygan River Near 1,640 7 1,350 1,780 1,840 3.27 591.21 Cheboygan, Mich. 1305 Black River 2,340 2 1,130 2,250 2,450 7.13 658.00 Near Tower, Mich. 1315 Rainy River Near 946 5.5 730 1,120 19450 6.33 674.85 ocqueoc, Mich. 1320 Black River Near 2,500 4 1,430 2,700 2,925 5.74 609.26 Cheboygan, Mich. 1325 Thunder Bay River 19380 10 830 1,880 2,080 8.86 760 Near Hillman, Mich. 1335 Thunder Bay River 4,070 5 2,100 5,650 6,450 9.99 671.96 Near Bolton, Mich. 1355 Au Sable River at 274 2.5 162 278 298 3.00 1,123.49 Grayling, Mich. 1365 Au Gres River at 1,310 5.5 495 1,550 19840 8.88 646.58 McIvor, Mich. 1385 Au Gres River Near 1,970 18.5 1,040 4,500 5,450 7,87 710 National Cityo Mich. 1390 Houghton Creek Near 955 2.5 335 1,000 1,150 7.15 864.55 Lupton, Mich. 1395 Rifle River "At the 1,330 1.6 495 1,280 1,460 10.10 857.47 Ranch" Near Lupton, Mich. 1400 Prior Creek 584 1.5 192 545 625 5.64 840 Near Selkirk, Mich. 1405 Rifle River at 2,760 2 920 2,750 3o2OO 6.67 828.47 Selkirk, Mich. 1420 Rifle River Near 5,340 3.5 2,220 5,800 6,600 13.74 649.48 Sterling, Mich. Lake Huron Central--Planning Subarea 3.2 1435 N. Br. Kawkawlin River 1,540 11 700 2,650 3,150 10.33 584.00 Near Kawkawlin, Mich. 1440 Shiawassee River at 2,900 9 1,400 4,350 5,000 12.58 811.54 Byron, Mich. 1445 Shiawassee River at 6,240 5 2,250 8,100 9,600 10.35 707.25 Owosso, Mich. 1450 Shiawassee River 7,500 7 3,450 lOoOOO 11,500 13.44 587.80 Near Fergus, Mich. 1460 Farmers Creek 1,280 2.2 305 1,325 1,600 19.87 805.79 Near Lapeer, Mich. 1475 Flint River 6,150 6 1,800 8,850 10,000 14.97 721.39 Near Otisville, Mich. 1485 Flint River 14,900 1.2 4,600 13,400 15,250 16.35 678.80 Near Flint, Mich. 1490 Flint River 19,000 1.6 5,800 18,250 21,000 18.5 582.22 Near Fosters, Mich. 1500 S. Br. Cass River - - 2,150 - - - 719.5 Near Cass City, Mich. 1505 Cass River at Cass 8,460 11 3,050 16,250 20,000 15.80 697.92 City, Mich. 1510 Cass River at Vassar, 11,400 16 5,100 26,500 33,000 16.70 612.38 Mich. 1515 Cass River at 17,700 18 6,450 29,500 35,500 20.88 583.96 Frankenmuth, Mich. 1525 Tobacco River at 7,680 5 3,680 8,600 10,500 12.95 683.27 Beaverton, Mich. 44 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-yeaF of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (Z prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Huron Central--Planning Subarea 3.2 (continued) 1535 Salt River Near 8,200 4 2,000 - - 14.95 616.01 Bradley, Mich. 1540 Chippewa River Near 4,960 3 1,825 5,250 6,100 12.78 710.38 Mt. Pleasant, Mich. 1545 Chippewa River 8,510 3 2,950 9,000 - 9.85 612.35 Near Midland, Mich. 1550 Pine River at 4,400 3 1,380 5,100 6,100 10.81 718.37 Alma, Mich. 1555 Pine River Near 6,360 4 2,200 7,420 8,650 10.00 623.94 Midland, Mich. 1560 Tittabawassee River at 34,000 6 12,500 41,000 54,500 19.50 580.28 Midland, Mich. 1585 Pigeon River Near 2,550 12 725 6,400 8,400 10.75 645 Owendale, Mich. Lake Erie Northwest--Planning Subarea 4.1 1595 Black River 14,400 9 5,000 24,500 30,500 16.06 613.75 Near Fargo, Mich. 1640 Clinton River 8,000 5 3,400 9,900 11,250 19.5 577.71 Near Fraser, Mich. 1645 N. Br. Clinton River 5,830 6 2,250 8,200 9,650 16.87 576.38 Near Mt.Clemens, Mich. 1655 Clinton River at 21,200 2 5,250 22,400 26,500 12.15 570.43 Mt. Clemens, Mich. 1660 River Rouge at 700 6 275 925 1,100 5.60 715.94 Birmingham, Mich. 1665 River Rouge at 13,000 0.7 1,900 9,450 11,400 23.0 584.00 Detroit, Mich. 1670 M. River Rouge Near 2,150 6 1,050 2,650 3,000 10.50 600.95 Garden City, Mich. 1680 L. River Rouge at 3,120 6 1,425 4,100 4,700 12.42 593.14 Inkster, Mich. 1690 Huron River at 266 2 11Q 260 290 2.98 910.00 Commerce, Mich. 1700 Huron River at 645 2 310 665 740 8.25 880.00 Milford, Mich. 1705 Huron River Near New 1,080 0.6 340 860 965 5.05 868-00 Hudson, Mich. 1715 Oregon Creek Near 193 0.7 785 168 185 16.50 850.56 Brighton, Mich. 1720 Huron River Near 1,560 1 585 1,400 1,580 8.35 850.00 Hamburg, Mich. 1725 Portage River Near 529 1 175 490 560 5.72 860.38 Pinckney, Mich. 1730 Huron River 3,120 1 1,075 2,900 3,350 8.17 837.11 Near Dexter, Mich. 1735 Mill Creek 1,300 7 700 1,650 1,850 12.2 850-00 Near Dexter, Mich. 1745 Huron River at 5,840 1.2 1,900 5,300 6,010 10.66 744.81 Ann Arbor, Mich. 1765 River Raisin Near 12,900 5 5,400 16,250 18,500 10.7 616.26 Monroe, Mich. Lake Erie Southwest--Planning Subarea 4.2 1780 St. Joseph River 9,710 3 4,000 10,600 .12,200 17.05 795.40 Near Newville, Ind. 1795 Cedar Creek at 1,520 4 840 1,650 1,850 9.20 847.14 Auburn, Ind. Flood Characteristics 45 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1927 -Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (% prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Erie Southwest--Planning Subarea 4.2 (continued) 1800 Cedar Creek Near 4,870 10.5 2,750 6,100 6,650 11.67 780.09 Cedarville, Ind. 1815 St. Marys River at 11,300 5.5 5,500 14,250 16,250 24.22 760.44 Decatur, Ind. 1820 St. Marys River Near 13,600 3.5 5,800 15,400 17,500 19.42 748.97 Ft. Wayne, Ind. 1830 Maumee River at 19,100 4 12,250 20,500 22,000 21.4 724.51 New Haven, Ind. 1835 Maumee River at 26,200 3 12,500 28,500 33,000 20.29 694.90 Antwerp, Ohio 1845 Bean Creek at 4,250 8.5 2,000 6,000 6,950 13.82 722.57 Powers, Ohio 1850 Tiffin River at 6,640 2.5 2,850 9,200 10,750 16.16 685.1 Stryker, Ohio 1865 Auglaize River Near 12,000 3.5 4,700 13,500 15,600 20.30 713.6 Jennings, Ohio 1875 Ottawa River at 7,740 2 3,000 7,950 8,950 10.88 789.14 Allentown, Ohio 1890 Blanchard River 15,000 2 4,850 15,000 17,500 16.76 754.55 Near Findlay, Ohio 1891 Tiderishi Creek - - 175 630 750 - - Near Jenera, Ohio 1905 Roller Creek at - - 215 580 670 - - Ohio City, Ohio 1915 Auglaize River 52,500 4.5 23,500 63,000 73,000 26.4 659.70 Near Defiance, Ohio 1925 Maumee River Near 87,100 5.8 44,000 100,900 125,000 11.00 659.12 Defiance, Ohio 1935 Maumee River at 94,000 5 48,000 110,000 125,000 14.52 595.71 Waterville, Ohio 1960 Sandusky River Near 5,800 4.0 2,430 6,800 7,850 9.15 955.04 Bucyrus, Ohio 1965 Sandusky River Near 10,000 6.0 4,600 12,800 14,900 15.00 792.25 Upper Sandusky, Ohio 1970 Sandusky River Near 19,000 6.3 8,100 25,700 30,000 22.5 733.1c Mexico, Ohio c 1980 Sandusky River Near 28,000 9.8 14,200 40,200 49,000 15.20 626.3 Fremont, Ohio c 1990 Huron River at 48,900 0.28 9,800 31,800 37,500 31.1 573.43 Milan, Ohio 1995 Vermilion River Near 40,800 1.9 6,850 40,000 51,500 17.14 594.91 Vermilion, Ohio Lake Erie Central--Planning Subarea 4.3 2005 Black River at 51,700 0.2 7,900 23,700 27,800 26.4 621.6 d Elyria, Ohio 2015 Rocky River 21,400 1.1 8,150 19,400 22,000 20.9 649.9 Near Berea, Ohio e 2060 Cuyahoga River at 6,500 0.47 2,900 5,450 5,950 11.54 740.11 Old Portage, Ohio e 2080 Cuyahoga River at 24,800 0.2 8,300 17,200 19,000 22.41 584.14 Independence, Ohio 2090 Chagrin River at 28,000 1.7 9,500 28,800 33,200 17.95 594.24 Willoughby, Ohio f 2115 Mill Creek Near 9,810 0.43 3,400 7,700 8,600 12.50 822.59 Jefferson, Ohio c 2120 Grand River 21,100 0.8 8,900 18,300 20,300 14.73 674.47 Near Madison, Ohio 46 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (% prob) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Erie Central--Planning Subarea 4.3 (continued) 2125 Ashtabula River Near 11,600 2.0 4,400 11,600 13,300 11.03 612.5 e Ashtabula, Ohio e 2130 Conneaut Creek at 17,000 1.5 5,900 16,000 18,500 12.94 610.3 Conneaut, Ohio Lake Erie East--Planning Subarea 4.4 2135 Cattaraugus Creek at 35,900 3.4 15,500 40,000 46,000 14.14 738.74g Gowanda, N.Y. e 2145 Buffalo Creek at 13,000 5.0 7,000 15,300 17,000 11.90 604.04 Gardenville, N.Y. e 2150 Cayuga Creek Near 8,750 6.5 5,200 10,500 11,700 12.58 672.80 Lancaster, N.Y. e 2155 Cazenovia Creek 13,500 3.0 6,800 14,400 16,000 15.82 604.86 at Ebenezer, N.Y. 2165 Little Tonawanda Creek 2,700 3.0 1,010 2,950 3,440 16.04 1081.62 at Linden, N.Y. h 2170 Tonawanda Creek at 7,200 6.8 3,740 9,250 10,500 13.85 876.01 Batavia, N.Y. Lake Ontario West--Planning Subarea 5.1 2215 Genesee River at 23,300 1.7 7,500 22,600 26,500 11.22 1438.83 Scio, N.Y. 2230 Genesee River at k 44,400 3.5 22,200 48,800 54,500 12.81 1082.60 Portageville, N .Y. 2250 Canaseraga Creek 9,110 5.6 3,900 11,800 13,800 13.68 640.OOj Near Dansville, N.Y. 2275 Genesee Riverm at 55,100 0.95 21,800 48,700 54,800 25.44 540.00j Jones Bridge n 13,800 5.3 103300 15,100 16,000 25.44 - i 2305 Oatka Creek at 6,920 3.5 2,280 8,000 9,600 8.64 560.89 Garbutt, N.Y. i 2310 Black Creek at 4,880 1.0 1,370 4,150 4,880 9.44 552.45 Churchville, N.Y. 0 2320 Genesee River at Driving 48,300 0.4 22,500 40,200 44,000 17.08 247 Park, Rochester, N-Y-m 25,800 4.8 16,800 28,800 313000 17.08 Lake Ontario Central--Planning Subarea 5.2 2330 Cayuga Inlet 4,110 4.5 1,280 5,250 6,400 7.58, 437.16. 1 Near Ithaca, N.Y. c 2340 Fall Creek 15,500 0.08 3,190 8,800 10,200 9.52 794.81 Near Ithaca, N.Y. 2425 East Br. Fish Creek 13,600 0.9 6,790 12,400 13,500 10.90 491.12 at Taberg, N.Y. i 2435 Oneida Creek at 7,440 11.0 3,230 13,500 16,500 14.30 409.33 Oneida, N.Y. 2440 Chittenango Creek 2,690 12.5 1.500 4,350 5,130 7.18 489.54 Near Chittenango, N.Y. i 2450 Limestone Creek at 7,010 5.3 2,580 9,350 11,300 7.95 427.62 Fayetteville, N.Y. Lake Erie Ontario East--Planning Subarea 5.3 2525 Black River Near 12,400 0.3 5,450 9,900 10,700 12.5 935.50 Boonville, N.Y. 2560 Independence River at 3,410 3.2 1,830 3,650 4,000 8.8 972.84 Donnattsburg, N.Y. Flood Characteristics 4 7 TABLE 2-3(continued) Flood Characteristics of Streams Instantaneous Discharge Frequency Gage Height 1929 Datum Station Flows of Record 2-year 50-year 100-year of Record Gage Zero No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (7 prob) (cts) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) Lake Erie Ontario East--Planning Subarea 5.3 2625 West Br. Oswegatchie 6,920 2.7 3,980 7,200 7,800 9.6 738.51 River Near Harrisville, N.Y 2650 Grass River at Py;ites, 8,300 2.8 4,550 8,700 9,600 13.0 350.61 N.Y. 2690 St. Regis River at 16,800 1.4 7,400 15,900 17,600 15.3 217.23 Brasher Center.N.Y. (ice jam) aAt different site and (or) datum. See station description. bAffected by backwater. c1912 datum. dCity of Elyria BM. eUnadjusted. fAshtabula Co. BM. gVillage of Gowanda BM. hBatavia BM. iCorps of Engineers. JN.Y.S. Conservation Comm. kPrior to 1945 gage record published as "at St. Helena". 'Prior to 1920 gage record published as "at Rochester". MPertinent data based on period of record prior to construction of Mt. Morris Dam. nP ertinent data based on period of record subsequent to construction of Mt. Morris Dam. Drainage area regulated by Mt. Morris Dam is 1,075 square miles. 0Barge Canal Datum. 48 Appendix 2 4,000 2,000 1,000- F3 Boo - 000@ 600 4001:0@ L _L 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SO.M1.) 100 200 300 400 500 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .95 1 2.25 4.20 6.40 8.90 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-20 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 1. 1, Poplar River at Lutsen, Minn. (114 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 8,000 6,000 4,000 -1-100 000-@ Uj ir 2,000 ow 1,000 95 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA(SO.Mi.) 100 200 300 400 500 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .60 1.15 1.75 2.35 2.95 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-21 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sidnaw, Mich. (171 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Flood Characteristics 49 20,000 10,000 9,000 76,000- Uj 44,000 2,000 0-0@ 1,000- 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 0.5 EXCEEOENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA(SO.M1.) @400 600 SOD 1000 FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 .40 1 .80 1.20 1 50 1.80 DRAJNAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-22 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 2.1, Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wis. (514 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 6,000 4,000- Z 2,000 Uj 0 1,000 800- 600 400 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SO.MO 50 100 150 1 200 250 FACTOR MULTIPLIER A5 .85 1.20 1 1.50 1 1.80 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-23 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet At Hobart, Ind. (125 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 50 Appendix 2 80,00 60poo 40,000 w '0@ 'q 20,000 11-1-00 Cn 1-01 0 01-100 10,000 '00.00 8,000 00, 6,000- 1 1 1 1 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FD-RAINAGE AREA (SO.M1.) 11000 12000 13000 140 1 FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 .20 1 .40 1 .60 1 .80 1.05 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-24 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 2.3, Grand River at Grand Rapids, Mich. (4,900 Sq. Mi. Drain- age Area) 10,000 8,000 6, 000 w 0 4,000 2.00 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FD-RAINAGE AREA (SO.MO 1 400 1 800 11200 11600 120001 FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 .25 1 .50 1- .70 1 .90 1 1.10 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-25 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 2.4, Manistee River Near Manistee, Mich. (1,780 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 8,000 40,000 6,000 30,000 4,000 100, 20,000 2,00 10,000 8,000- w Uj - 0 0 4 6,000- x A/ 1,000 Soo 4,000-- 600-- 400 2,000 / or 200 1,000- 95 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 0.5 95 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 EXCEEOENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) EXCEEDENCE FREOUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE DRAINAGE AREA (SO.M1.) 50 100 150 200 250 DRAINAGE AREA(SO.Ml.) 200 400 60 5:0 IFACTOR MULTIPLIER .35 .65 .90 1.15 1. 4; 01 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .35 .65 9 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FA FIGURE 2-26 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- FIGURE 2-27 Peak Discharge Frequency C area 3.1, Au Gres River Near National City, Mich. (169 Sq. Mi. area 3.2, Cass River at Vassar, Mich. (700 Sq. Drainage Area) 52 Appendix 2 40,000 30,000 000000 .00' 20,000 00/ W 10,000 0 8,000- a6,000 00/000 4,000 - /00000 2,000 95 90 60 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREGUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SO.M1.) 200 400 1 600 1900 10001 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .35 .6" .85 1.10 1.35 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-28 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 4.1, Clinton River at Mt. Clemens, Mich. (734 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 40,000 20,000 LU 0 U 10,000 8,000 6,000 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREOUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) IDRAINAGE AREA(SQ.M1.) 400 1 800 11200 11600 2000 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .25 1 A5 1 .65 .85 1 1.05 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-29 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 4.2, Maumee River at New Haven, Ind. (1,966 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Flood Characteristics 53 40,000 20,000 J0000 10,000- 8,000 6,000 4,000 95 90 7 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREOUIENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SO.M0 @400 r*OO -8 :0:0::] 1000 FACTOR MULTIPLIER A5 1 .75 1.05 1 25 1 1.45 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-30 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 4.3, Grand River at Madison, Ohio (581 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 60,000 40,000 - e-00 0000 20,000 U 10,000- - 10000' 8,000 w0ge 6,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREOUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SQ.M 1.) FRI 200 300 400 5@O @O FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 .35 1 .55 .75 .95 1.10 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-31 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 4.4, Cattarau@gus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y. (432 Sq. Mi. Drain- age Area) 54 Appendix 2 60,000 40,000 0000,00 Z w 0 0000 U L- 20,000 oo-_@ 00000 10,0001 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SQ.M0 1 400 1 800 11200 11600 11800 FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 .50 1 .85 1 1.15 1 1.45 1.75 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-32 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y. (961 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 20,000 10,000- 'L'ooo 8,000- 7 6,000 ooo.@ w AD oo@ 4,000- 2,000 oo-@ 1,0001 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SQ.M0 T_@K] 400 600 @ 1000 FACTOR MULTIPLIER 1 1.40 1 2.30 3.20 1 4.00 1 4.80 DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ;;00@ FIGURE 2-33 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y. (126 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Flood Characteristics 55 80,000 60,000 40,000 w 20,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,0114@ 95 90 a 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 5 2 1 0.5 EXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) DRAINAGE AREA (SO.M1.) 400 1 800 11200 11600 F'2000 E0:0 FACTOR MULTIPLIER .70 1 1.30 1 1.90 1 2.50 1 3.1flo DRAINAGE AREA ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FIGURE 2-34 Peak Discharge Frequency Curve, Planning Sub- area 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y. (616 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Section 4 DROUGHT FLOWS 4.1 General touched. Because each of these local rains con- tributes to the discharge of the main stream, Low-flow data are important for design of larger basins are likely to provide a more sus- water supplies, waste treatment plants, hy- tained flow than smaller ones. droelectric power, agricultural and industrial operations, low-flow releases, and recreation. Sustained low flows may require development 4.3 Low-Flow Frequencies of additional sources of supply such as ground- water or storage reservoirs (see Appendix 3, The low-flow characteristics of a stream can Geology and Ground Water). An analysis of be evaluated through the use of a low-flow drought flows may also help municipal and discharge-frequency statistical analysis of industrial water users plan alternative pro- streamflow records. As available streamflow grams such as recirculation and improved records on most of the tributaries to the Great water management. A knowledge of a Lakes cover relatively short periods, a reliable stream's low-flow characteristics is extremely picture of the drought regimen cannot always important before meaningful legal appropria- be obtained from an examination of low- tion of its water can take place. Not only is it streamflow records alone. Therefore, any in- important to know the rate of low flow but its vestigation of droughts should include a duration and volume must also be determined. thorough search of historical records in news- paper files, historical society libraries, long- term climatological records, and other 4.2 Seasonal Occurrences sources. As the low-flow data contained in this sec- Low flows occur each year on streams ti6n are derived entirely from streamflow re- throughout the Basin as runoff diminishes cords, they may be somewhat misleading in due to increased losses by evapotranspiration presenting an accurate evaluation of the ex- and seasonal variances in rainfall distribu- treme drought, especially if a known drought tions. Runoff within the Great Lakes Basin is occurred outside of the period of record. Be- usually lowest in the months of August and cause droughts are always associated with September. Several stations also experience periods of deficient precipitation, an examina- low flows in January and February during the tion of rainfall records is also valuable. Rain- winter freeze-up. Instantaneous minimums fall records usually cover many more years have occurred at various locations in the Basin than streamflow records. Low-flow frequency in all months, but predominantly in July curves based on nonexceedence frequency for through October. However, a prolonged low selected'durations at hydrologic stations in flow may be more critical than the lowest in- each planning subarea are shown in Figures stantaneous discharge during a given period. 2-35 through 2-49. The figures include only After surface runoff ceases, the entire flow that part of the range that is applicable. Addi- of the stream is drawn from ground-water tional low-flow data for selected stations are storage. As this storage is depleted, the tabulated in Table 2-4, which lists the 1- and streamflow diminishes until either the stream 7-day duration low-flow of record along with goes dry or the supply is replenished by pre- the 7-day, 10-year low-flow, and the 1-day, 30- cipitation. These replenishing rains are often year low-flow frequency values. In addition, local, some covering an area of only a few the lowest instantaneous observed flow of rec- square miles. Scores of such rains may fall on ord is shown. Working papers filed in the various portions of a large drainage basin dur- Great Lakes Basin Commission office also ing a given drought, although many of the contain the 1-day, 50-year low-flow frequency small component basins may be left un- values for each hydrologic station. The low 57 58 Appendix 2 flow of record data tabulated in Table 2-4 rep- data refer to the lowest average 1-day or 7-day resent the lowest average flow ever recorded low flow expected to have a 3.3-percent and at that station for either a 1-day or 7-day con- 10-percent chance, respectively, of occurring tinuous period. The nonexceedence frequency in any one year. TABLE 2-4 Low Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations Low Flow Low Flow Instantaneous of Record 1-Day of Record 7-Day Lowest Observed Station I-Day 30-Year 7-Day 10-Year Flow of Record No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Superior West-Planning Subarea 1.1 105 Pigeon River at Middle Falls, 33.6 36.0 33.6 46.0 27.0 Minnesota 125 Poplar River at Lutsen, Minnesota 4.8 5.2 7.1 8.4 2.3 145 Baptism River at Beaver Bay, Minnesota 0.4 1.2 0.9 2.7 0.4 170 Embarrass River at Embarrass, Minnesota 0.9 0.78 0.9 1.7 0.9 255 Bois Brule River at Brule@ Wisconsin 88.0 90.0 94.0 102.0 67.0 270 Bad River at odanah, Wisconsin 52.0 48.0 54.0 66.0 49.0 275 White River at Ashland, Wisconsin 72.0 68.0 129.0 129.0 3.1 300 Montreal River at Saxon, Wisconsin 7.0 10.0 8.0 26.0 2.0 Lake Superior East-Planning Subarea 1.2 320 Presque Isle River near Tula, Michigan 22.0 24.0 23.7 30.5 22.0 405 Sturgeon River near Sidnaw, Michigan 4.8 5.3 5.3 8.3 4.6 425 Otter River near Elo, Michigan 71.0 68.0 73.1 75.5 68.0 430 Sturgeon River near Arnheim, Michigan 157.0 167.0 168.0 209.0 157.0 455 Tahquamenon River near Paradise, Michigan 174.0 170.0 184.0 190.0 157.0 Lake Michigan Northwest-Planning Subarea 2.1 590 Escanaba River at Cornell, Michigan 100.0 105.0 159.0 163.0 90.0 610 Brule River near Florence, Wisconsin - 135.0 - 158.0 118.0 645 Pine River at.Pine River Power Plant near Florence, Wisconsin 0.10 - 41.0 - 0 660 Menominee River near Pembine, Wis. 1,000.0 950.0 1,090.0 1,110.0 708.0 665 Pike River at Amberg, Wisconsin 26.0 45.0 53.0 72.0 26.0 680 Peshtigo River at High Falls near Crivitz' Wisconsin 0.10 - - 8.0 0 710 Oconto River near Gillett, Wisconsin 116.0 145.0 152.0 179.0 93.0 735 Fox River at Berlin, Wisconsin 248.0 270.0 266.0 337.0 248.0 755 Wolf River above West Branch Wolf River, Wisconsin 199.0 195.0 217.0 227.0 199.0 770 Wolf River at Keshena Falls, Wisconsin 194.0 240.0 260.0 305.0 91.0 785 Embarrass River near Embarrass, Wisconsin 24.0 28.0 27.0 47.0 23.0 790 Wolf River at New London, Wisconsin 216.0 290.0 337.0 467.0 150.0 800 Little Wolf River at Royalton, Wisconsin 55.0 68.0 74.0 98.0 52.0 810 Waupaca River near Waupaca, Wisconsin 50.0 72.0 103.0 117.0 38.0 860 Sheboygan River at Sheboygan, Wis. 1.0 3.3 9.0 13.0 1.0 865 Cedar Creek near Cedarburg, Wisconsin 0.2 0.28 0.2 1.0 0.2 870 Milwaukee River at Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1.0 2.2 8.0 22.0 0 Drought Flows 59 TABLE 2-4(continued) Low Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations Low Flow Low Flow instantaneous of Record I-Day of Record 7-Day Lowest Observed Station 1-Day 30-Year 7-Day 10-Year Flow of Record No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Michigan Southwest-Planning Subarea 2.2 905 Thorn Creek at Thornton, Illinois 4.4 4.9 9.5 10.8 4.4 910 Little Calumet River at South Holland, Illinois 8.0 8.8 14.3 18.0 7.9 930 Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Indiana 4.2 2.8 5.0 4.8 2.0 940 Little Calumet River at Porter, Indiana 17.0 17.0 18.7 18.8 15.0 945 Salt Creek at McCool, Indiana 14.0 15.5 14.9 19.4 6.3 Lake Michigan Southeast-Planning Subarea 2.3 975 St. Joseph River at Three Rivers Michigan 78.0 78.0 126.0 190.0 0 990 St. Joseph River at Mottville, Michigan 39.0 120.0 278.0 342.0 0 995 Pigeon Creek at Hogback Lake near Angola, Indiana 3.4 3.1 3.5 6.4 3.4 1002.2 North Branch Elkhart River near Cosperville, Indiana 2.2 1.5 3.2 4.2 2.2 1005 Elkhart River at Goshen, Indiana 7.0 20.0 49.6 76.0 6.6 1010 St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Indiana 336.0 380.0 561.0 750.0 0 1015 St. Joseph River at Niles, Michigan 420.0 340.0 728.0 930.0 0 1025 Paw Paw River at Riverside, Michigan 120.0 120.0 134.0 143.0 99.0 1035 Kalamazoo River at Marshall, Michigan 31.0 30.0 59.4 82.0 12.0 1050 Battle Creek at Battle Creek, Michigan 22.0 23.0 24.7 32.0 0 1055 Kalamazoo River near Battle Creek, Michigan 86.0 100.0 106.0 165.0 0 1060 Kalamazoo River at Comstock, Michigan 185.0 170.0 217.0 250.0 119.0 1085 Kalamazoo River near Fennville, Michigan 73.0 135.0 257.0 400.0 0 1090 Grand River at Jackson, Michigan 12.0 13.0 14.0 22.0 9.2 1110 Grand River near Eaton Rapids, Michigan 21.0 21.0 52.4 64.0 14.0 1125 Red Cedar River at East Lansing, Michigan 3.0 3.7 3.9 8.0 3.0 1130 Grand River at Lansing, Michigan 20.0 28.0 44.4 70.0 2.8 1140 Grand River at Portland, Michigan 58.0 55.0 85.3 105.0 38.0 1145 Looking Glass River near Eagle, Michigan 11.0 11.0 11.0 15.0 10.0 1150 Maple River at Maple Rapids, Michigan 4.8 47.0 5.7 9.0 4.4 1160 Grand River at Ionia, Michigan 115.0 120.0 155.0 180.0 105.0 1165 Flat River at Smyrna, Michigan 70.0 72.0 114.0 120.0 7.4 1175 Thornapple River near Hastings, Michigan 35.0 36.0 36.4 48.0 33.0 1180 Thornapple River near Caledonia, Michigan 4.7 63.0 87.1 114.0 2.2 1185 Rogue River near Rockford, Michigan 49.0 49.0 58.1 68.0 28.0 1190 Grand River at Grand Rapids, Michigan 381.0 500.0 438.0 670.0 0 Lake Michigan Northeast-Planning Subarea 2.4 460 Black River near Garnet, Michigan 5.4 5.5 5.7 6.3 4.9 550 Manistique River near Blaney, Michigan 188.0 190.0 194.0 220.0 182.0 565 Manistique River near Manistique, Michigan 290.0 290.0 294.0 340.0 288.0 590 Escanaba River at Cornell, Michigan 150.0 105.0 174.0 165.0 90.0 60 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-4(continued) Low Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations Low Flow Low Flow Instantaneous of Record 1-Day of Record 7-Day Lowest Observed Station 1-Day 30-Year 7-Day 10-Year Flow of Record No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Michigan Northeast-Planning Subarea 2.4 (continued) 1210 Muskegon River near Merritt, Michigan 26.0 27.0 26.4 36.0 0 1215 Muskegon River at Evart, Michigan 252.0 260.0 274.0 300.0 164.0 1225 Pere Marquette at Scottville, Michigan 310.0 320.0 322.0 350.0 209.0 1230 Big Sable River near Freesoil, Michigan 81.0 80.0 82.6 87.0 65.0 1235 Manistee River near Grayling, Michigan 130.0 135.0 140.0 148.0 122.0 1255 Pine River near Hoxeyville, Michigan 175.0 170.0 180.0 185.0 161.0 1260 Manistee River near Manistee, Michigan 992.0 980.0 1,140.0 1,200.0 0 Lake Huron North-Planning Subarea 3.1 1300 Cheboygan River near Cheboygan, Michigan 90.0 88.0 148.0 215.0 0 1325 Thunder Bay River near Hillman, Michigan 98.0 98.0 110.0 116.0 0 1365 Au Sable River at Mio, Michigan 456.0 440.0 533.0 570.0 18.0 1385 Au Gres River near National City, Michigan 7.0 6.7 8.4 8.7 5.9 1420 Rifle River near Sterling, Michigan 98.0 100.0 105.0 115.0 75.0 Lake Huron Central-Planning Subarea 3.2 1440 Shiawassee River at Byron, Michigan 20.0 19.0 22 '1 27.0 19.0 1445 Shiawassee River at Owosso, Michigan 2.0 4.2 7.7 19.0 0.2 1450 Shiawassee River near Fergus, Michigan 29.0 27.0 34.6 39.0 27.0 1460 Farmers Creek near Lapeer, Michigan 0.5 0.68 0.8 1.2 0 1485 Flint River near Flint, Michigan 14.0 0.24 23.1 40.0 9.0 1500 South Branch Cass River near Cass City, Michigan 0.2 - 0.4 1.0 0.2 1505 Cass River at Cass City, Michigan 0.5 0.58 0.8 1.9 0.5 1510 Cass River at Vassar, Michigan 9.6 9.4 13.7 16.0 8.6 1515 Cass River at Frankermuth, Michigan 1.5 2.5 14.1 18.0 0 1525 Tobacco River at Beaverton, Michigan 5.9 - 52.9 78.0 5.6 1535 Salt River near North Bradley, Michigan 1.4 1.25 2.2 2.7 1.1 1540 Chippewa River near Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 19.0 30.0 49.4 68.0 12.0 1545 Chippewa River near Midland, Michigan 44.0 44.0 84.6 88.0 0 1550 Pine River at Alma, Michigan 0.4 66.0 17.9 27.0 0 1555 Pine River near Midland, Michigan 14.0 16.0 16.7 41.0 0 1560 Tittabawassee River at Midland, Michigan 111.0 106.0 126.0 170.0 39.0 Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 1595 Black River near Fargo, Michigan 2.0 2.6 2.7 5.0 1.8 1640 Clinton River near Fraser, Michigan 49.0 50.0 59.4 66.0 47.0 1645 North Branch Clinton River near Mt. Clemens, Michigan 0.2 0.29 0.5 1.0 0.2 1655 Clinton River at Mt. Clemens, Michigan 25.0 33.0 36.7 54.0 0 1660 River Rouge at Birmingham, Michigan 0.2 0.41 0.3 1.0 1.02 1665 River Rouge at Detroit, Michigan 1.8 2.3 2.7 5.0 0 Drought Flows 61 TABLE 2-4(continued) Low Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations Low Flow Low Flow instantaneous of Record 1-Day of Record 7-Day Lowest Observed Station 1-Day 30-Year 7-Day 10-Year Flow of Record No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Erie Northwest-Planning Subarea 4.1 (continued) 1670 Middle River Rouge near Garden City, Michigan 1.4 2.7 3.2 5.0 0.9 1680 Lower River Rouge at Inkster, Michigan 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.0 0.2 1695 Huron River at Commerce, Michigan 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 3.9 1700 Huron River at Milford, Michigan 7.2 6.4 15.9 18.0 0 1730 Huron River near Dexter, Michigan 41.0 35.0 46.6 54.0 38.0 1765 River Raisin near Monroe, Michigan 4.9 8.6 5.1 27.0 2.0 Lake Erie Southwest-Planning Subarea 4.2 1780 St. Joseph River near Nevville, Indiana 14.0 16.0 15.3 18.0 0 1795 Cedar Creek at Auburn, Indiana 0.7 0.45 0.8 2.0 0.5 1800 Cedar Creek near Cedarville, Indiana 13.0 14.5 17.6 19.0 12.0 1815 St. Marys River at Decatur, Indiana 5.4 5.2 6.2 8.0 4.7 1820 St. Marys River near Ft. Wayne, Indiana 1.0 5.4 4.9 8.0 0 1835 Maumee River at Antwerp, Ohio 26.0 51.0 45.1 66.0 24.0 1845 Bean Creek at Powers, Ohio 5.2 4.8 6.2 7.0 5.0 1850 Tiffin River at Stryker, Ohio 3.9 4.2 4.3 7.6 3.6 1875 Ottawa River at Allentown, Ohio 2.4 9.0 3.6 12.0 1.4 1890 Blanchard River near Findlay, Ohio 0.4 1.4 0.6 2.7 0 1935 Maumee River at Waterville, Ohio 26.0 32.0 49.6 74.0 20.0 1960 Sandusky River near Bucyrus, Ohio 0.6 0.55 0.8 0.8 0.4 1965 Sandusky River near Upper Sandusky, Ohio 0.6 0.72 0.7 1.4 0.5 1970 Sandusky River near Mexico, Ohio 2.0 3.3 4.5 7.0 1.8 1980 Sandusky River near Fremont, Ohio 5.0 6.6 6.6 10.8 4.4 1990 Huron River at Milan, Ohio 3.0 2.4 3.4 3.8 2.2 1995 Vermilion River near Vermilion, Ohio 0 0 0 0.1 0 Lake Erie Central-Planning Subarea 4.3 2005 Black River at Elyria, Ohio 1.3 1.3 2.1 3.2 0 2015 Rocky River near Berea, Ohio 0.2 0.29 0.3 1.1 0.2 2060 Cuyahoga River at Old Portage, Ohio 24.0 37.0 42.0 42.9 14.0 2080 Cuyahoga River at Independence, Ohio 21.0 28.0 37.0 58.0 14.0 2090 Chagrin River at Willoughby, Ohio 3.0 4.5 7.0 11.3 3.0 2115 Mill Creek near Jeffersons Ohio 0 0 0 0 0 2120 Grand River near Madison, Ohio 0 0.08 0 0.8 0 2125 Ashtabula River near Ashtabula, Ohio 0 0 0 0 0 2130 Conneaut Creek at Conneaut, Ohio 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.4 0.2 Lake Erie East-Planning Subarea 4.4 2135 Cattaraugus Creek at Gowanda, New York 52.0 45.0 56.0 63.0 6.0 2145 Buffalo Creek at Gardenville,_ New York 1.0 1.6 2.6 3.6 0.2 2150 Cayuga Creek near Lancaster$ New York 0.1 0.09 0.2 0.38 0 2155 Cazenovia Creek at Ebenezer, New York 3.1 3.6 3.5 4.8 2.6 2165 Little Tonawanda Creek at Linden, New York 0.1 0.23 0.1 0.27 0.08 2170 Tonawanda Creek at Batavia, New York 0.6 0.53 1.1 2.6 0.4 62 Appendix 2 - TABLE 2-4(continued) Low Flow Discharge Frequency at Selected Gaging Stations Low Flow Low Flow instantaneous of Record 1-Day of Record 7-Day Lowest Observed Station 1-Day 30-Year 7-Day 10-Year Flow of Record No. 4- Stream and Station (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Lake Ontario West-Planning Subarea 5.1 2215 Genesee River at Scio, New York 6.9 9.6 7.3 13.3 5.8 2230 Genesee River at Portageville, New York 32.0 33.0 39.0 51.0 18.0 2250 Canaseraga Creek near Dansville, New York 10.0 10.0 11.1 13.9 3.0 2275 Genesee River at Jones Bridge 30.0 35.0 54.4 77.0 12.0 2305 Oatka Creek at Garbutt, New York 13.0 12.0 13.6 16.0 3.3 2310 Black Creek at Churchville, New York 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.82 0.3 2320 Genesee River at Driving Park, N.Y. 91.0 180.0 104.0 350.0 10.0 Lake Ontario Central-Planning Subarea 5.2 2330 Cayuga Inlet Near Ithaca, New York 1.9 1.8 2.2 2.5 1.7 2340 Fall Creek near Ithaca, New York 3.6 4.8 5.0 8.8 3.0 2425 East Branch of Fish Creek at Taberg, New York 5.2 6.8 6.3 14.0 4.9 2435 Oneida Creek at Oneida, New York. 13.0 13.0 15.4 15.7 12.0 2440 Chittenango Creek near Chittenango, New York 10.0 9.2 11.1 11.5 9.8 2450 Limestone Creek at Fayetteville, New York 12.0 13.0 13.4 17.0 6.4 Lake Ontario East-Planning Subarea 5.3 2525 Black River at Boonville, New York 7.0 16.0 19.3 41.5 5.0 2560 Independence River at Donnattsburg, New York 18.0 17.0 19.9 20.5 18.0 2625 West Branch Oswegatchie River near Harrisville, New York 27.0 29.0 33.6 42.0 25.0 2650 Grass River at Pyrites, New York 59.0 58.0 59.7 72.0 59.0 2690 St. Regis River at Brasher Center, New York 105.0 110.0 111.0 148.0 34.0 Drought Flows 63 40 20 10 7 DAY 0 -j U. a- 3C 0 I DAY 4 21 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREOUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-35 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 1.1, Poplar River at Lutsen, Minn. (114 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 20 1 DAY 7 DAY 10 0 .j W 8 39 0 6 21 95 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREOUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-36 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River near Sidnaw, Mich. (171 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) LOW FLOW (cfs) LOW FLOW (cfs) (ON CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 t,,D ND P tD 0 1 t-2 z Q4 0 0 -4 00 z z m 0 z .0 m x m COD 0 A MO r" .01 z a no m, -4 z 0 0 rn M 0 10 z 0 n 0 0 -0 V. 0 (A A pli z e+ 0 z z c ro tv 0 0 0 M e.f. PP. m 0- rn n z m r- m z C'.4 ; (A m e+ @S Drought Flows 65 400 200 7 DAY, 100 0 1 DAY-/ i N.- 0 _j 60 0 20' 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCE OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-39 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Lansing, Mich. (1,230 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 4@000 2,000 0 _j 7 DAY 1,500 1,000 Boo 'r-,-I DAY !5 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 .NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCE OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-40 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 2.4, Manistee River Near Manistee, Mich. (1,780 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 1,000 ZSOO- J@-7 DAY 600!!!!- 0 40 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCE OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-41 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 3.1, Au Sable River at Mio, Mich. (1,100 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 66 Appendix 2 1000 Soo Soo 7400 3: 0 U- X 0 200- -7 DAY Ion 1* 1 DAY -45 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-42 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 3.2, Tittabawassee River at Midland, Mich. (2,400 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 200 100 so 7 DAY 0 so- 0 -i 40 \.I DAY 2oL - 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-43 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea4.1, Huron River Near Dexter, Mich.(506 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Drought Flows 67 400 200 "INN 100 7 DAY _j U- so 3: 0 _j 60 -1 D AY 40 2 5 90 0 7 0 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-44 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.2, Maumee River at Waterville, Ohio (6,329 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 40 20- 3: -7 DAY 0 to 0 _3 \.1 DAY 6 4 2 95 90 so 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-45 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 4.3, Chagrin River at Willoughby, Ohio (246 Sq. Mi. Drain- age Area) 68 Appendix 2 200 100 -70AY 0 -i LL so 0 60 40 DAY 95 90 80 70 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-46 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curv 'es, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cattaraugus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y. (432 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 200 100 so 39 0 -j LL 60- 3: 7 DAY 0 .j I DAY 20" 95 90 SLO 7'0 6'0 50 40 30 2 LO 1 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-47 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y. (961 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Drought Flows 69 20 .7 DAY I DAY- 10 0 U. 0 _j 6 2 95 90 80 TO 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-48 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y. (126 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) 500 400 0 200 _j U. 01 _::::::@"<.7 DAY 100 1 >.AY I DAY 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 NONEXCEEDENCE FREQUENCY OF ANNUAL OCCURRENCE (Percent) FIGURE 2-49 Low Flow Discharge Frequency Curves, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y. (616 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) Section 5 SURFACE WATER AVAILABILITY STUDIES 5.1 General converted to annual inches of runoff.per square mile by dividing discharge by the An evaluation of the total surface water drainage area and multiplying by 13.574. An- availability of a river basin is fundamental to nual runoff in acre-feet can be computed by sound water resource planning. The limits to multiplying average annual discharge in efs which a stream can supply or yield water must by 724. Monthly mean discharge in efs, shown be known before that fixed minimum amount in Tables 2-1 and 2-3, is converted to monthly can be allocated or appropriated to the some- inches of runoff per square mile by dividing times conflicting demands upon the water. discharge by drainage area and multiplying The maximum yield a stream can produce is by 1.13. Monthly runoff in acre-feet is com- the average runoff over the period of record, puted by multiplying monthly average dis- assuming the period of record is representa- charge in cfs by 60. tive. Average discharge values for selected hydrologic stations in each planning subarea are listed in Table 2-1. The maximum percent- 5.3 Mass Curve-Storage Volumes age of the average runoff that is practical to develop is related to the monthly, seasonal, Many methods have been developed to de- and yearly variation in runoff; duration of termine surface water availability. One of the drought or low-flow periods; evaporation and simplest procedures used to analyze recorded other losses from surface water runoff; diver- runoff is the mass curve analysis. This method sion, size, and location of potential and exist- generally produces results adequate for a ing storage sites; and the total volume of con- framework study. The mass runoff curve is a sumptive use. In general, streams with little plot on a time scale of the cumulative running variation in runoff over a period of time and total of mean monthly (or other duration) dis- large storage potential can be expected to fur- charge for a continuous period of record. A nish a yield approaching average runoff specific slope of line on the mass curve repre- minus evaporation and other losses. However, sents a unique runoff, and the slope of the line streams with a large variation in runoff over a connecting the two ends of the mass curve period of time and only very small storage po- represents the average runoff for the period of tential can be expected to furnish yield only record. One mass curve of runoff for a selected slightly greater than minimum base now. This hydrologic station in each planning subarea is section develops -a basic framework-scope shown in Figures 2-50 through 2-64. Care was methodology for estimating storage required given to assure that the hydrologic station to produce a sustained yield from an ungaged selected would be representative of conditions stream with a known drainage area. expected for all stations within the planning subarea. The maximum vertical distance be- tween lines drawn parallel to the average 5.2 Hydrologic Conversion Factors runoff but tangential to the periodic and adja- cent high and low points on the mass curve The average discharge can be represented defines the volume of storage required to yield in cfs at the gaging location, efs per square the average runoff continuously if evapora- mile of contributing drainage area, inches of tion and other losses are ignored. This same runoff per year over the drainage basin, acre- procedure can be used to determine the stor- feet of runoff per year over the drainage basin, age volume required to produce any yield less or acre-feet of runoff per square mile of drain- than average runoff by selecting the proper age area depending upon the purpose for slope of the reference line segments. An which the data will be used. Average annual example is shown in Figure 2-50. discharge in cfs, shown in Table 2-1, can be A major drawback inherent in mass curve 71 72 Appendix 2 analysis is that the results are associated with For example, at the site in question, it is no statistical probabilities. Because nature decided to develop a sustained yield of 30 cfs. never repeats itself exactly, a period of record The site is in Planning Subarea 1.1 on the is unique and the extreme low flows occurring Temperance River, Minn., and has an up- during that particular period may or may not stream drainage area of 100 square miles. be rare events. The expected probabilities of From Figure 2-1 it is determined that hy- recurrence of actual periods of extreme low drologic station 125 Istfie-c-fosest'station geo- flow would be information necessary for the graphically, and station 145 is the closest hy- proper assessment of an area's water re- drologic station to the Temperance River hav- sources. The Ohio Department of Natural Re- inga storage yield relationship. sources has published such an analysis of From Table 2-1, the assumed annual dis- streamflow data collected in that State. The charge would be 90 cfs, determined by dividing method and results are mentioned in Bulle- the average discharge for station 125 by its tins 374 and 40.12 These amplify previous drainage area and then multiplying by the studies published as Bulletin 13 .5 The method drainage area of the ungaged site, that is, used is similar to that developed by John B. (103/114) X 100 equals 90 cfs. The desired sus- Stall.6 tained yield of 30 efs is 33 percent of the com- puted average discharge. From Figure 2-65, the storage yield curve 5.4 Storage Yield Relationships for Selected for station 145, a storage of 120 acre-feet per Stations square mile is needed to produce a sustained yield of 33 percent of average discharge. Mul- Figures *2-65.through 2-79, developed from tiplying 120 by 100 square miles suggests that the mass curves, define the relaiionships be- a total storage of 12,000 acre-feet, not includ- tween required storage per square mile of con- ing evaporation, transmission losses, and tributing drainage area and the percent of av- other losses, would be required to produce a erage runoff that the stream can yield if that sustained yield of 30 efs at the site in question. amount of storage is furnished. However, the relationships do not include evaporation, transmission losses, or any other loss that 5:6 Streamflow Routing Characteristics may be unique to a basin. Required storage should be increased by the amounts of these During a flood, duration, magnitude, and losses. The data from Figures 2-65 through volume of the flow are usually modified by the 2-79 can be used to determine storage re- physical characteristics of the stream. quirements needed to furnish a given percent- Mathematical expressions, procedures, or co- age of average runoff reported at hydrologic efficients developed by an analysis of stations in each planning subarea shown in expe rie nced-di s charge hydrographs at Table 2-1. When using the data, the hydrologic selected intervals along the stream to define station being studied should be matched with the time of travel and the change in hydro- the mass curve station developed for that graph peaks, duration, shape, and volume are planning subarea. Although it would be pref- defined as the streamflow routing charac- erable to match a hydrologic station with mass teristics. Because the routing characteristics curve data for a particular hydrologic area, a depend not only upon the physical charac- relatively high degree of confidence can be teristics of the stream but also on the mag- placed on the method developed for this ap- nitude of discharge, detailed design work re- pendix. quires that these characteristics be analyzed separately for each reach of stream being studied. However, this detail is beyond the 5.5 Sample Storage Requirement Calculation scope of a framework report and is not in- cluded in this appendix for streams in the Data in this appendix can be used to esti- Great Lakes Basin. Several of the reports mate the storage required to produce a sus- listed in the Bibliography include routing tained yield from an ungaged stream with characteristics for specific areas, and these known drainage area. reports can be consulted for this information. Surface Water Availability Studies 73 48 U- 44 040- 0 ACRE-FEET C@ - STORAGE CAPA- 0 36 o@@_/IITY REQUIRED TO HAINTAW AVERAGE FLOW LL LL 32- 0 z :3 ir >. 28- _j Z 24 0 2 - z 20- 159 Ui tL 125 0 16 10 0 _j 4 T 5 1.- 12-- 0 50U I.- - U) w > 8- _j 4 0 1932 1938 1944 1950 1956 1962 1968 FIGURE 2-50 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 1.1, Baptism River at Beaver Bay, Minn. 36 LL 33 030 0 C@ 27 0__ z 21 z is z < 15 w 2 U. o 12 0 _j 0 9 w 6 _j U 0 ZL I I I I I I I I 1 1 1944 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 FIGURE 2-51 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 1.2, Sturgeon River Near Sidnaw, Mich. 74 Appendix 2 F@ 14 U- 13 - 0 012- c@ Oil U.10 U- 0 z =) 9 8- z o 7- 2 z < 6- w 2 W 0 5- U) -i 4- 0 3-- w 2 U -77 D 0. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 FIGURE 2-52 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.1, Pine River Powerplant, Wis. @-: 14 LL. 13 - 0 o12- c@ 0 011 c@ 110 LL LL 0 z9- 0 X 8 z7- 0 w Z. U@ 5- 4- 03- ;zf j7- 2- D 0 1 1 1 f I I I I I I I 1 1 1922 1926 1930 1934 1938 1942 1946 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 FIGURE 2-53 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind. Surface Water Availability Studies 75 18 17 - U- 416-- 0 015- C@ 014 C@ UO- 12 z r Z9- 0 2 z w 2 7- LL 0 U) 0 @- 4 w 2- 0 Lj 1933 1938 1943 1948 53 1958 1963 1968 FIGURE 2-54 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.3, Grand River at Lansing, Mich. U- 22- - 020- 0 C@ 0 0 C@ 18 LL 16- 0 z D cr x z 12- 0 z w i 0 2 LL. 0 0 w > 4- D 0 1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 19L60 19%4 19 8 FIGURE 2-55 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 2.4, Muskegon River at Evart, Mich. 76 Appendix 2 70 6.5- 06.0 2 0 C@ 05.5- 0 C@ 5.0 U. 04.5- z 4.0 Z 3.5 0 2 4z 3.0 U. 2.5 - 0 2.0 0 @- 1.5- w 1.0 - 20.5- 0 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 FIGURE2-56 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 3.1, Rifle River at Sterling, Mich. LUL 1 015- 1 014- 0 0 .13- 0 0 12 LU- L 0 z =!O 9- 8- z 0 27- z 4 w6- a U' 5- 0 4 03- 1- w 2- 0 1939 1943 1947 1951 1955 1959 1963 1967 FIGURE2-57 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 3.2, Flint River at Fosters, Mich. Surface Water Availability Studies 77 u- 20 0 0 18 C@ 0 0 16 C@ 7 LL U. 014 z D a: >- 12 z 0 10 8 w 7! LL 6 o 4 w > 2 0, D 1904 1912 1920 1928 1936 1944 1952 1960 1968 U FIGURE 2-58 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.1, Huron River at Ann Arbor, Mich. 20 L) " 18 0 0 0 616 0 C@ LL 14 LL 0 z 12 10 z <z8 w 2 LL6 0 U) 4 0 w 2- 0 1938 1944 1950 1956 1962 1968 FIGURE 2-59 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.2, Sandusky River at Fremont, Ohio 78 Appendix 2 LL 13- 012 0 c@ 0 oil- c@ LL. 10 - U. 0 z 9- z 7- 0 2 Z 6 w U. 5- 0 cn _j 3- w > 2 _j U 0 1938 1944 1950 1556 1962 1967 FIGURE 2-60 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.3, Grand River Near Madi- son, Ohio 14 U_ 13 - 0 012 c@ 0 oil- ci L, 10 L LL 0 z9- 8 X IZ z7- 0 X. z6 w V LL 5- 0 U)4 03- w 2 0 1940 A945 1950 1955 1960 1965 FIGURE 2-61 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 4.4, Cattaraugus Creek at Gowanda, N.Y. Surface Water Availability Studies 79 56 ,,52- 048 C@ 044- 0 C@ 1 40 U- LL 0 3ra- z >- 32 j X z 28- z 24 4 Uj 220- LL 0 16 o12- w >8 4- U0- 1908 f 916 1924 f932 1940 1948 1956 1964 FIGURE 2-62 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.1, Genesee River at Portageville, N.Y. 6.0 LL 5.5- 05.0- 0 0 6 04.5 C@ LL 4.0- 0 z m 3.5 z 3.0- 0 z 42.5- w LL 02.0 0 w 1.0 74 :)0.5 U 0 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1969 FIGURE 2-63 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.2, Fall Creek Near Ithaca, N.Y. 80 Appendix 2 36@ 1--: U. 33 0 030 ct 0 0 C@ 27 - I 24- 0 z :3 >. 21 18 0 2 z 415 w oo LL 012 09 w >6- 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 If J11 III I I I I II I I I I 1 1 1920 1926 1932 1938 1944 1950 1956 1962 1968 FIGURE 2-64 Mass Curve of Runoff, Planning Subarea 5.3, St. Regis River at Brasher Center, N.Y. Surface Water Availability Studies 81 13-- 9 12 -- L w11 7 9- 6-- w w (L 0. 8- w w w w5-- 7 w cr U _U Z < 0 0 Z Z3 w 7L W_ 04-- < ir 0 0 3 2 0[-----1LI I I I I 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT OF AVERAGE FLOW PERCENT OF AVERAGE FLOW FIGURE 2-65 Generalized Storage Yield Re- FIGURE 2-66 Generalized Storage Yield Rela- lationship, Planning Subarea 1.1, Baptism tionship, Planning Subarea 1.2 Sturgeon River River at Beaver Bay, Minn. (140 Sq. Mi. Drain- Near Sidnaw, Mich. (171 Sq. Mi. Drainage Area) age Area) 14 iO__ 13-- 9-- A 10-- CY7 9 w w 6-- w W, cr 0 wo 0 0 5-- 3 4- 0: 10 3-- 02 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 so 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 so 90 100 R RCENT 0 PERCENT OF AVERAGE FLOWPE F AVE AGE FLOW FIGURE 2-67 Generalized Storage Yield Re- FIGURE 2-68 Generalized Storage Yield Re- lationship, Planning Subarea 2.1, Pine River at lationship, Planning Subarea 2.2, Deep River at Pine River Powerplant, Wis. (528 Sq. Mi. Drain- Lake George Outlet at Hobart, Ind. (125 Sq. Mi. age Area) Drainage Area) w - 0 _@TORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SQUARE MILE - STORAGE IN 100 ACRE- FEET PER IT i@ - N N p po 0 0 0 0 0 m W 0- -. :r :3 0 A 0 ez 0 ts: no z C4 000 0 'o il m m 0. X.0 ;c C, p m ro@ 0- 00 0 00- eD CL eD 0 0 STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SQUARE MILE STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER :01 :91 fA .01 0 - N , w .4 4 m b ip b Z. b @p b t o ItIZI 0- -J m no "ZI rn o po 0,0 10 M. 00, A G) 'o m 00 0 0 0- e-4,I STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SQUARE MILE STORAGE IN 100 ACRE FEET PER 0 0 0 no Gq 0 ZA 10 0, > < PO < '0 00 10- 0, 00-- Gq aq 0 0 aq IT > @,- 0J= 0 It IT It let 8 -1 -p .1 '? 9 o P, m I - > STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SQUARE MILE > STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER 0 w 0 I'D (D ro go 'A o 14 eD 0 M.4 "o It o 0 riq m eD z o oo > <m WQ..j 0 0 0 0 0- Oq pv 1 90m r. M aq OV M (D 31 1 eD 0 oil STORAGE IN 100 ACRE -FEET PER SO - CD w 0 et. 0 w o m z o" @0 STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SQUARE MILE > A 4 ch CD -W NO m 0, @m 0 -1 (71 m Z , A = M 0 -4 00 tz 01 0 99 v @.c 0 o'- M no 0-- m 0,00 e+ = _- X. N < It m STORAGE IN 100 ACRE - FEET PER SO ow mr So OD G) m 0 0 1 0- 9 CO 3t 0 e+ 1 0 Z. o 0 00 0 no mz 00 'o ;> < 0 w 0 Section 6 RESERVOIR SITES 6.1 General Commission. Table 2-6 is a listing by planning subarea of the number of existing and poten- In order to satisfy future water needs, it tial sites in the Great Lakes Basin not listed in may be necessary in some cases to stabilize Table 2-5. streamflows through reservoir control. To provide a base for analysis of this water man- agement alternative, an inventory of existing 6.3 Upground Storage Reservoirs and potential reservoir sites within the Basin was compiled and is listed in Table 2-5. Much An upground storage reservoir is an earth of the data collected was provided from inven- structure designed to impound water. Unlike tories already available from State and local the more common on-stream reservoir, an up- agencies. In most cases, site data were eval- ground storage reservoir is located off the uated from topographic maps and, wherever main stream channel, so that water must be practical, verified by field reconnaissance. conveyed from the stream to it for storage. When analyzing the total storage potential for Usually this requires a river pump station and a specific site, allowances should be made for a pipeline to the reservoir unless it is possible sedimentation in the reservoir, losses at- to fill the reservoir by gravity flow through a tributable to seepage and evaporation, and canal from the stream. quality of reservoir inflows. Development of upground reservoirs is usu- ally less economical than development and op- eration of on-stream facilities because of the 6.2 Existing and Potential Sites high pumping costs. However, they do have advantages which may offset the direct In compiling the inventories, more than economic shortcoming. Upground reservoirs 2,500 existing and potential reservoir sites can be constructed almost anywhere land is were analyzed. Because the smaller, low- available. They have smaller overall land re- capacity sites would have insignificant impact quirements, since they have uniform depth, no on framework-scope study results, only those siltation problem, and flexibility in location so sites having more than 500 acres of available that disturbance of wildlife habitats, histori- surface area have been listed in Table 2-5 and cal and aesthetic sites, and existing stream shown in Figures 2-80 through 2-94. Included valley development can be minimized. in table 2-5 are data on site location, drainage In northwest Ohio, an area of relatively flat area, pool area, and estimated storage capaci- topography, 21 communities in the area oper- ty. Some of the data listed were obtained from ate 40 upground storage reservoirs. The inventories developed a number of years ago largest structure in this area is at Lima, Ohio, and may no longer be completely applicable which has a pond area of 694 acres. Only four when considering potential sites. Thus, before other sites are larger than 100 acres. Those analyzing a specific reservoir site, the avail- range in pond area from 121 to 277 acres. ability of the site should first be verified to see Available information on potential upground if any encroaching developments might reservoir sites in northwest Ohio indicates 36 have occurred. Also, many potential sites locations that would provide an additional might have reservoirs that cross State bound- 7,755 acres of water surface area. aries. Planning studies for such reservoirs Two upground reservoirs, covering more should include close coordination between the than 800 acres each, are being constructed in planning agencies of the States involved. Michigan. One is on the Lake Michigan shore Data on sites with less than 500 acres sur- near Ludington and the other is off the Tit- face area are included with working papers on tabawassee River at Midland. file in the office of the Great Lakes Basin 85 86 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5 Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Superior West--Planning Subarea 1.1 1 e Beaver River Minnesota 52N 15W 47 5,100 39,650 2 e Beaver River Minnesota 51N 14W 25 3,400 15,360 3 e Cloquet River Minnesota 52N 15W 546 9,900 171,500 4 e Otter River Minnesota 53N 15W 60 4,480 29,440 5 e Whiteface River Minnesota 56N 14W 130 6,800 81,920 6 St. Louis River Minnesota - 300,000 7 Baptism River Minnesota 34 57N 7W 194 1,300 33,000 8 Poplar River Minnesota - - - 243 - 93,000 9 Cascade River Minnesota 12 61N 2W - - 35,000 10 Brule River Minnesota - - 62,000 11 Bad River Wisconsin - 47N 3W 570 - 44,000 Lake Superior East--Planning Subarea 1.2 Latitude Longitude 1 e Au Train Au Train, Mich. 46' 19' 860 51' 80 1,950 12,300 2 e Carp Deer Lake, Mich. 460 32' 870 40' 36.3 1,700 22,500 3 e Dead Hoist, Mich. 460 34' 870 34' 141 4,236 55,300 4 e Dead Silver Creek, Mich. 46' 39' 870 50' 24 - 26,800 5 e Sturgeon Prickett, Mich. - - 400 - 6,000 6 e Ontonagon Victoria, Mich. - - 650 - 45,700 7 e South Br. Ontonagon Cisco Lake Dam, Mich. - 0- - - 10,500 8 e West Br. Ontonagon Bergland Dam, Mich. 460 35' 89 33' 162 14,080 35,200 9 e Middle Br. Ontonagon Bond Falls, Mich. - - 190 - 32,400 10 Sturgeon Tibbets Falls, Mich. - - 155 - 46,000 11 Sturgeon Big Falls, Mich. - - 322 - 46,000 Lake Michigan Northwest--Planning Subarea 2.1 Sec- Town- tion -ship Range I Peshekee MIchigan 36 5ON 31W 19 580 5,000 2 Peshekee Michigan 8 49N 30W 23 640 9,000 3 Baraga Creek Michigan 10 49N 30W 8.5 500 7,000 4 Peshekee Michigan 2 48N 30W 46 1,200 23,000 5 Dislino Creek Michigan 6 48N 29W 19.5 1,400 35,000 6 West Branch Peshekee Michigan 3 48N 30W 55.5 1,300 18,000 7 Beaufort Lake Michigan 21 48N 31W 20 820 1,600 8 Lake Michigamme Michigan 9 47N 30W 193 4,200 8,400 9 Wolf Dalles, Wis. - 604 - 9,000 Latitude Longitude 10 e Michigamme Peavy Falls, Mich. 450 59' 880 13' 710 3,160 34,000 11 e Michigamme Way Dam, Mich. 46' 10' 880 14' 642 7,000 119,950 Lake Michigan Southwest--Planning Subarea 2.2 None Lake Michigan Southeast--Planning Subarea 2.3 Sec- Town- tion ship Range I Upper Grand Michigan 27 45N 1W 25.6 510 4,300 2 Lower Grand Michigan 31 9N 15W 29.0 580 6,200 3 Lower Grand Michigan 18 7N 14W 41.0 640 6,000 Reservoir Sites 87 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Michigan Southeast--Planning Subarea 2.3 (continued) 4 Lower Grand Michigan - 7N 14W 35.0 710 9,300 5 Thornapple Michigan 35 5N. 9W 50.0 870 10,500 6 Thornapple Michigan 6 4N 8W 26.0 940 19,500 7 Thornapple Michigan 17 3N 9W 31.0 1,060 15,100 8 Thornapple Michigan 31 3N 7W 32.0 1,900 2,500 9 Thornapple Michigan 4 2N 6W 13.0 570 11,600 10 Middle Grand Michigan 13 6N 8W 23.0 590 20,000 11 Middle Grand Michigan 25 7N 6W 53.0 980 19,300 12 Red Cedar Michigan 33 3N 1W 32.0 2,220 25,000 13 Upper Grand Michigan 3 15N 3W 35.0 2,230 12,300 14 Red Cedar Michigan - - 9.8 1,230 12,600 15 Doan Creek Michigan - - - 32.5 2,030 25,000 16 Doan Creek Michigan - - - 26.7 1,950 25,000 17 Deer Creek Michigan - - - 21.9 1,850 25,000 18 Maple Michigan - - - 10.1 500 3,000 19 Maple Michigan - - - 7.4 740 7,880 20 Sleepy Hollow Michigan - - - 11.1 546 8,210 21 Battesse Creek Michigan - - - 18.2 715 3,200 22 Battesse Creek Michigan - - - 21.7 1,120 7,370 23 Western Creek Michigan - - - 13.0 1,780 15,120 24 Indian Creek Michigan - - - 4.0 540 5,720 25 otter Creek Michigan - - 7.4 1,400 10,400 26 Upper Grand Michigan - - 3.7 530 3,410 27 Columbia Creek Michigan - - 14.8 980 11,700 28 Looking Glass Michigan - - 9.8 530 3,670 29 Vermillion Creek Michigan - - 49.9 1,400 10,805 30 Bad Creek Michigan - - 20.1 1,380 12,340 31 Portage Michigan - - 30.1 2,200 7,800 32 Butternut Drain Michigan - - 15.6 650 3,420 33 Thornapple Michigan - - - 71.7 5,500 25,000 34 Little Thornapple Michigan - - - 23.5 1,690 18,080 35 Little Thornapple Michigan - - - 28.8 2,040 23,650 36 Lacy Creek Michigan - - - 11.2 1,150 14,090 37 Thornapple Michigan - - - 9.1 750 7,760 38 Thornapple Michigan - - - 15.9 540 7,490 39 Cedar Creek Michigan - - - 16.2 520 8,260 40 Cedar Creek Michigan - - - 25.3 800 13,720 41 Nash Creek Michigan - - - 12.5 1,100 22,010 42 Rogue Michigan - - - 9.2 680 17,570 43 Mill Creek Michigan - - - 10.7 520 5,400 44 Deer Creek Michigan - - - 25.8 1,360 21,880 45 Bass Creek Michigan - - - 29.1 970 7,850 46 Crockery Creek Michigan - - - 28.4 750 7,740 47 Rio Grande Creek Michigan - - - 11.0 580 6,470 48 Lower Grand Michigan - - - 4.8 600 5,750 49 Grand River Michigan 20,21,29 7N 5W 1,777 3,100 56,000 50 Grand River Michigan 8,17 5N 5W 1,418 5,500 158,000 51 Grand River Michigan 20 5N 5W 1,400 3,600 105,000 52 Grand River Michigan 27 5M 5W 1,382 1,920 37,500 53 Grand River Michigan 35 4N 3W 856 5,780 63,700 54 Grand River Michigan 15 3N 3W 846 1,800 14,500 55 Grand River Michigan 32,33 IN 2W 569 27,600 221,300 56 Grand River Michigan 9 is 1W 409 19,300 109,300 57 Grand River Michigan 26,35 3S 1W 53 1,200 6,900 58 Grand River Michigan 33,34 4S 1W 10 520 7,500 59 Crockery Creek Michigan 13,14 8N 15W 160 2,320 27,700 60 Crockery Creek Michigan 28 9N 14W 110 1,070 19,700 61 Rogue Michigan 25 9N 11W 231 5,310 78,300 62 Bear Creek Michigan 30 8N low 27 720 16,400 88 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Michigan Southeast--Planning Subarea 2.3 (continued) 63 Thornapple Michigan 21 5N low 798 7,000 115,000 64 Coldwater Creek Michigan 36 5N low 192 3,370 68,400 65 Coldwater Creek Michigan 6 4N 8W 80 2,180 24,200 66 Campbell Lake Michigan 29,30 5N 9W 10 2,460 39,900 67 Thornapple Michigan 32 4N 9W 525 550 5,700 68 Cedar Creek Michigan 9 2N 9W 44 3,460 109,700 69 Unnamed Creek Michigan 23 3N 8W 6 730 13,600 70 Highbank Creek Michigan 31 3N 7W 32 3,480 4,630 71 Mud Creek Michigan 9 3N 7W 53 1,260 15,700 72 Scipio Creek Michigan 30 3N 6W 10 1,060 10,600 73 Thornapple Michigan 27,34 3N 6W 190 4,600 42,500 74 Thornapple Michigan 24 3N 6W 161 2,790 20,900 75 Thornapple Michigan 29 3N 6W 190 7,350 87,600 76 Lacey Creek Michigan 36 3N 6W 24 1,710 23,300 77 Flat Michigan 13 7N 9W 578 2,020 51,600 78 Flat Michigan 4 1ON 8W 50 1,920 9,600 79 Prairie Creek Michigan 16 7N 6W 100 1,820 61,900 80 Stony Creek Michigan 26 7N 4W 139 4,890 48,950 81 Maple Michigan 9 7N 5W 766 11,220 89,000 82 Fish Michigan 24 8N 5W 161 1,220 35,600 83 Fish Michigan 35,36 -9N 5W 141 2,870 97,000 84 Pine Creek Michigan 31,32 9N 3W 82 2,170 47,490 85 Maple Michigan 10,11 8N 1W 205 8,210 61,000 86 Dickerson Creek Michigan I 8N 8W 101 990 14,900 87 Looking Glass Michigan 34 6N 5W 312 3,230 36,700 88 Looking Glass Michigan 1 5N 5W 310 3,350 35,970 89 Looking Glass Michigan 15 5N 3W 262 1,330 10,910 90 Looking Glass Michigan 4 5N 1E 161 2,110 11,500 91 Sycamore Creek Michigan 2,11 3N 2W 102 1,300 14,000 92 Mud Creek Michigan 33 3N 1W 32 3,160 31,650 93 Red Cedar Michigan 27 4N 1W 306 2,040 23,800 94 Red Cedar Michigan 5 3N 2E 228 6,610 67,200 95 Doan Michigan 17.18 3N 2E 33 2,610 38,900 96 Spring Brook Michigan 22,23 is 3W 18 2,200 19,100 97 Sandstone Creek Michigan 28 is 3W 89 7,460 115,120 98 Portage Michigan 3 2S 1E 159 10,440 20,880 99 Thornapple Michigan 10 5N low 803 2,690 41,400 100 Quaker Brook Michigan 1 2N 7W 17 660 7,240 101 Hayworth Creek Michigan 18 8N 3W 50 920 14,300 102 Little Maple Michigan 34 7N 1W 12 1,530 18,800 103 Alder Creek Michigan I 6N 1W 6 910 14,200 104 Buck Creek Michigan 22 6N 12W 44 560 5,940 105 Glass Creek Michigan 20 3N 9W 31 1,610 29,720 106 Spring Brook Michigan 10,11 6N 2E 9 1,020 14,400 107 Grand River Michigan 2 1N 3W 652 3,900 44,000 108 Sand Creek Michigan 27 7N 13W 41 1,470 29,600 109 Plaster Creek Michigan 17 6N IN 44 2,750 64,600 110 Dickerson Creek Michigan 15 9N 7W 96 1,090 19.000 111 e Grand River Michigan - 4,883 600 - 112 e Grand River Michigan 33 7N 5W 1,751 660 - 113 Augusta Creek Michigan - - - 21 33,000 90,000 114 Wanadoga. Creek Michigan - - - 44 4,800 80,000 115 Wanadoga Creek Michigan - - - 820_ 6,000 116 Rice Creek Michigan - - - 91 10,000 90,000 117 Rice Creek Michigan - - - 2,000 13,000 118 Rice Creek Michigan - - - - 700 3,000 Latitude Longitude 119 e Kalamazoo Morrow Lake 42' 17' 850 24' 1,000 1,000 6,000 120 e Kalamazoo Lake Allegan 420 34' 850 57' 1,540 1,600 17,200 Reservoir Sites 89 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name ar State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Michigan Southeast Planning Subarea 2.3 (continued) 121 St. Joseph Michigan 21 5S 18W 3,900 5,000 126,000 122 Paw Paw Michigan 11,12 3S 16W 300 2,400 16,400 123 Rocky Michigan 23 5S 12W 70 1,750 12,200 124 Rocky Michigan 24 5S 12W 70 780 6,500 125 Rocky Michigan 25 5S 12W 135 1,100 7,700 126 Nottawa Creek Michigan 20,29 5S 9W 180 520 3,200 127 Nottawa Creek Michigan 1 5S 8W 160 3,000 19,000 128 Nottawa Creek Michigan 29 4S 8W 150 3,800 36,800 129 Coldwater Michigan 9,10 5S .7W 290 570 7,800 130 Dowagiac Creek Michigan 12 7S 17W 255 600 3,000 131 Dowagiac Creek Michigan 30 6S 16W 255 1,040 9,100 132 Brush Creek Michigan 22 3S 15W 34 1,030 18,000 133 Fawn Indiana 17 38N 10E 160 1,800 11,200 134 Fawn Michigan 16 8S 9W 140 2,540 26,000 135 Bango Creek Indiana 26 37N 4E 70 3,100 36,500 136 St. Joseph Indiana 28 38N 6E 2,840 1,850 7,000 137 White Pigeon Michigan 10,11 8S 12W 210 560 4,100. 138 Pipestone Creek Michigan 3 5S 18W 59 920 17,450 139 Mill Creek Michigan 26 3S 17W 28 600 6,400 140 East Branch Paw Paw Michigan 17 3S 13W 46 1,165 17,900 141 Hog Creek Michigan 28 5S 5W 67 2,500 22,000 142 Beebe Creek Michigan 14 6S 3W 40 2,000 26,400 143 Pine Creek Indiana 18 37N 6E 31 790 9,483 144 Turkey Creek Indiana 33 36N 6E 183 920 5,500 145 St. Joseph Michigan 30 5S 9W 800 3,700 36,000 146 St. Joseph Michigan 34 5S 9W 611 4,200 50,000 147 St. Joseph Indiana 14 38N 6E 2,693 3,600 18,000 148 Little Elkhart Indiana 27,28,33 38N 7E 110 740 6,900 149 Pigeon Indiana 29 38N 9E 373 540 3,000 150 Elkhart Indiana 14 37N 5E 657 1,000 8,000 151 Prairie Indiana 28 6S low 180 12,400 14,000 152 Beebe Creek Indiana 13 6S 3W 44 1,350 11,600 153 Swan Creek Indiana 35 6S 8W 52 1,510 3,760 154 Prairie Indiana 31 6S 11W 56 860 4,300 155 Prairie Indiana 28 6S 1W 127 1,230 4,900 156 Rocky Indiana 25 5S 12W 115 2,340 18,450 157 Nottawa Creek Indiana I 5S 9W 159 3,080 22,260 158 St. Joseph Indiana 1 6S 9W 514 850 3,840 159 Fawn Indiana 9 8S 11W 73 1,290 7,470 160 Flowerfield Michigan 4 4S 12W 20 1,420 9,840 161 St. Joseph Michigan 33 4S 7W 217 1,480 15,840 162 St. Joseph Michigan 25 4S 5W 156 2,640 16,460 163 Pokagon Michigan 1,2 7S 16W 22 620 8,600 164 St. Joseph Michigan 1 5S 19W 4,170 4,610 33,100 165 Paw Paw Michigan 23 3S 18W 393 1,290 18,600 Lake Michigan Northeast Planning Subarea 2.4 1 Middle Br. Escanaba Michigan 21 49N 29W 16.5 1,100 26,000 2 Middle Br. Escanaba Michigan 16 46N 27W 170 580 8,300 3 Green Creek Michigan 24 46N 27W 8 -530 110000 4 Middle Br. Escanaba Michigan 7 45N 25W 230 55G 16,000 5 Goose Lake Michigan 24 47N 26W 14.6 520 2,000 6 East Br. Escanaba Michigan 4 45N 25W 112 600 7,000 7 e Manistee Michigan 31 22N 13W 1,451 1,540 - 8 e Muskegon Michigan 11 14N low - 610 - 9 e Muskegon Michigan 18 12N 11W 2,224 1,380 10 e Penoyer Creek Michigan 18 12N 12W - 3,970 11 e Manistee Michigan 30 23N 12W 1,018 2,025 90 Appendix 2. TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Latitude Longitude Lake Huron North Planning Subarea 3.1 1e Au Sable Alcona Pond, Mich. 44 0 34' 830 48' 1,469 1,075 - 2e Au Sable Cooke Dam, Mich. 44) 28' 83 0 34' 1,641 1,800 - 3e Upper So. Br. Fletcher Pond, Mich. 450 02' 83 0 47' 171 8,500 40,100 Thunder Bay 0 0 4e Au Sable Foote Basin, Mich. 44 0 26' 83 26' 1,664 1,850 - 5e Lower So. Br. Hubbard Lake, Mich. 44 52' 83' 36' 146 8,800 30,000 Thunder Bay 0 0 6 Thunder Bay Norway Point, Mich. 45 06' 83 31' 1,260 1,700 6,000 Sec- Town- tion ship Range Lake Huron Central Planning Subarea 3.2 1 Swartz Creek Michigan 1 5N 6E 28 1,340 18,500 2 Edwards Lake Michigan 22 21N 1E 48 920 8,600 3 Salt Michigan 7 15N 1W 138 580 5,400 4 Salt Michigan 15 15N 1W 200 920 10,200 5 Chippewa Michigan 16 14N 2W 420 1,170 15,800 6 Chippewa Michigan 20 14N 4W 320 3,000 46,700 7 Pine Michigan 8 12N 5W 101 3,265 45,000 8 South Br. Pine Michigan 15 13N 6W - 1,035 10,100 9 Pony Creek Michigan 26 14N 6W - 830 13,300 10 South Br. Flint Michigan 22,23 6N 10E 24 2,200 28,300 11 South Br. Flint Michigan 18 6N 11E 38 1,100 7,200 12 North Br. Flint Michigan 13 9N 9E 218 4,300 34,600 13 Farmers Creek Michigan 13 7N 9E 43 1,000 9,400 14 South Br. Flint Michigan 26 9N 9E 133 650 5,400 15 Thread Creek Michigan 29 6N 8E 15 1,100 15,400 16 Thread Creek Michigan 5 5N 8E 19 920 10,600 17 Yearsley Creek Michigan 27 7N 8E 63 2,300 35,800 18 Flint Michigan 27 9N 5E 1,048 800 14,100 19 Brent Run Michigan 15 9N 5E 37 930 16,400 20 Flint Michigan 33 ION 5E 1,108 11,050 12,100 21 Flint Michigan 11 8N 7E 613 2,000 24,300 22 Misteguay Creek Michigan 2,3 9N 4E 132 500 11,600 23 Cass Michigan 29 13N 10E 389 940 14,300 24 White Creek Michigan 29 13N 10E 140 640 4,900 25 East Br. Cass Michigan 18 13N 12E 227 1,430 21,000 26 South Br. Cass Michigan 22 13N 12E 139 680 8,600 27 Cass City Creek Michigan 28 14N 11E 11 1,500 6,500 28 Cass Michigan 34 12N 8E 721 700 6,600 29 Sucker Creek Michigan 20 12N IOE 95 630 4,000 30 North Br. Cass Michigan 10,15 14N 12E 70 910 7,600 31 Cass Michigan 26 11N 6E 873 1,150 12,200 32 Cass Michigan 6 13N 11E 368 510 3,400 33 Shiawassee Michigan 7 8N 3E 594 925 17,700 34 Shiawassee Michigan 14 6N 3E 441 3,350 48,200 35 Shiawassee Michigan 24 5N 4E 212 2,670 19,650 36 South Br.Shiawassee Michigan 29 5N 5E 170 7,750 87,500 37 South Br.Shiawassee Michigan 28 4N 4E 61 4,080 58,300 38 Bogue Creek Michigan 36 4N 4E 38 1,970 27,800 39 Cranberry Creek Michigan 26 4N 5E 5 860 9,700 40 South Br.Shiawassee Michigan 34 3N 4E 25 3,500 60,400 41 South Br.Shiawassee Michigan 12 2N 4E 7 1,230 15,900 42 Buckhorn Creek Michigan 27 4N 7E 8 1,450 28,700 43 Kenyon Lake Michigan 23 4N 7E 4 1,140 26,000 44 Shiawassee Michigan 12 4N 7E 14 2,030 49,800 45 Buckhorn Creek Michigan 10,11 4N 7E 21 860 10,800 Reservoir Sites 91 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Huron Central Planning Subarea 3.2 (continued) Latitude Longitude 46 e Flint Earl Holloway, Mich. 43 0 071 83' 30' 543 1,973 17,700 47 e Tittabawassee Sanford Lake, Mich. 43 0 41' 84' 23' 1,020 1,526 - 48 e Tittabawassee Wixom Lake, Mich. 43' 49' . 84 0 22' 985 2,178 Sec- Town- tion ship Range Lake Erie Northwest Planning Subarea 4.1 1 Black Michigan 18 7N 16E - 613 16,100 2 Black Michigan 18 7N 16E - 988 34,200 3 Black Michigan 15 7N 15E - 548 9,900 4 Black Michigan 8 7M 15E - 783 13,400 5 Black Michigan 29 8N 16E - 1,971 64,000 6 Pine Michigan - 4N 16E - 907 7,260 7 Pine Michigan - 5N 16E - 1,275 11,470 8 Pine Michigan 22 5N 16E - 1,665 18,000 9 Pine Michigan 16 5N 16E - 2,875 30,800 10 Pine Michigan 34 6N 16E - 604 6,400 11 Pine Michigan 17 6N 16E - 507 6,630 12 Belle Michigan 15 AN 16E - 688 6,000 13 Belle Michigan 6 4N 16E - 780 7,300 14 Belle Michigan 1 4N 15E - 820 9,670 15 Belle Michigan 29 5N 15E - 596 10,440 16 Belle Michigan 19 5N 15E - 689 13,200 17 Belle Michigan 18 5N 15E - 616 10,560 18 Belle Michigan 21 6N 14E - 1,012 10,780 19 River Raisin Michigan 10,15 6S 7E 1,039 2,520 17,500 20 River Raisin Michigan 24 6S 6E 761 1,180 9,100 21 River Raisin Michigan 1 8S 4E 634 1,170 6,700 22 River Raisin Michigan 29 6S 4E 463 1,320 19,500 23 Wolfe Creek Michigan 27 6S 3E 73 1,420 24,400 24 River Raisin Michigan 21 5S 4E 256 610 6,600 25 River Raisin Michigan 3 3S 3E 142 1,140 12,400 26 River Raisin Michigan 29 4S 6E 109 1,170 20,400 27 Saline Michigan 1 4S 5E 74 4,580 57,800 28 Bear Creek Michigan 36 7S 1E - 840 8,400 29 River Rouge Michigan 27 is 10E 193 671 5,168 30 River Rouge Michigan 9 2S 10E 116 599 5,972 31 Honey Creek Michigan 18019 1N 4E 84 1,600 18,000 32 Inchwagh Lake Michigan 26 1N 6E 17 850 7,000 33 Arms Creek Michigan 4 is 5E 18 1,025 8,900 34 Fleming Creek Michigan 25 2S 6E 31 560 8,700 35 Little Portage Lake Michigan 2 is 4E 82 790 12,000 36 Ore Creek Michigan 1 2N 6E - 514 43,000 37 Mann Creek Michigan 2,3 2N 6E 31 560 4,500 38 Upper Kent Lake Michigan 21 2N 7E 143 615 5,000 39 Upper Portage Lake Michigan 34 1N 3E - 2,950 19,000 40 Patterson-Bruin Michigan 31 is 3E 65 3,800 41,500 Lakes 41 Halfmoon Lake Michigan 32 is 4E 69 5,100 64,000 42 Honey Mill Creek Michigan 13 2S 5E 151 8,800 92,000 43 Mill Creek Michigan 20,29 2S 4E 131 8,800 92,500 44 Elk Lake Creek Michigan 30,32 8N 12E 22 1,100 14,200 45 East Branch Coon Michigan 36 4N 13E 44 1,290 11,300 46 Mill Creek Michigan 27,34 2S 4E 52 1,000 8,700 47 Bear Creek Michigan '32 8N 3E 15 505 4,217 48 Bear Creek Michigan 31,32 8N 4E 30 676 2,398 92 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Erie Northwest Planning Subarea 4.1 (continued) 49 Wolf Creek Michigan 32 6S 3E 64 7,10 9,900 50 Bear Creek Michigan 35 7S IE 10 807 10,750 51 Stoney Creek Michigan 34 7S 2E 4 840 5,300 52 Saline Michigan 28,29 4S 6E 104 600 8,320 53 e Huron Michigan 24 3S 7E - 975 - 54 e Huron Michigan 24 3S 8E 825 1,425 - Lake Erie Southwest Planning Subarea 4.2 1 West Br.St.Joseph Michigan 7 9S 3W 97 1,600 28,300 2 Bean Creek Michigan 34 7S 1E 129 2,040 35,000 3 Bean Creek Michigan 13 8S 1E 138 1,130 17,000 4 Bean Creek Michigan 28,29 6S 1E 57 1,560 19,000 5 West Br.St.joseph Michigan 3,4 8S 3W 29 510 9,200 6 East Br.St.Joseph Michigan 32 7S 1W 29 560 8,300 7 St. Marys Ohio - - - 69 4,990 41,433 8 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 14 528 2,210 Basin 9 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 121 760 3,253 Basin 10 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 59 1,190 6,844 Basin 11 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 55 875 4,911 Basin 12 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 31 636 3,437 Basin 13 Little Auglaize Ohio - - - 25 2,000 10,650 Basin 14 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 29 3,020 12,921 Basin 15 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 198 1,600 16,389 Basin 16 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 195 1,060 9,545 Basin 17 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 188 1,730 14,762 Basin 18 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 155 1,180 9,177 Basin 19 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 154 784 4,327 Basin 20 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 152 802 7,366 Basin 21 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 151 574 4,604 Basin 22 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 150 965 8,931 Basin 23 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 149 794 6,292 Basin 24 Upper Auglaize Ohio - - - 149 702 5,033 Basin 25 Ottawa River Basin Ohio - - - 23 1,230 10,588 26 Ottawa River Basin Ohio - - - 23 1,180 9,698 27 Ottawa River Basin Ohio - - - 247 939 5,678 28 Ottawa River Basin Ohio - - - 246 852 5,095 29 Ottawa River Basin Ohio - - - 107 1,080 11,663 30 Lower Blanchard Ohio - - - 39 611 3,806 Basin 31 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 9 532 2,630 Basin Reservoir Sites 93 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Erie Southwest Planning Subarea 4.2 (continued) 32 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 110 1,700 16,880 Basin 33 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 110 1,570 15,253 Basin 34 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 85 750 5,739 Basin 35 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 81 2,800 24,092 Basin 36 Upper Blanchard Ohio - - - 65 5,360 45,730 Basin 37 Upper Maumee-- Ohio - - - 25 1,020 5,586 Lower Auglaize Basins 38 Upper Maumee-- Ohio - - - 98 671 4,757 Lower Auglaize Basins 39 Upper Maumee-- Ohio - - - 27 584 4,481 Lower Auglaize Basins 40 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 799 10,400 117,547 41 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 20 550 5,709 42 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 796 8,670 95,756 43 Tiffin River Basin Ohi o - - - 56 814 8,379 44 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 712 7,720 85,321 45 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 106 1,530 15,929 46 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 30 1,050 14,118 47 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 29 833 10,128 48 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - 10 599 6,476 49 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - 9 679 6,752 50 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 604 5,730 59,541 51 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 64 1,610 12,890 52 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 35 590 4,818 53 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 508 3,070 27,775 54 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 31 618 8,501 55 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 29 653 5,217 56 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 21 677 6,015 57 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 445 1,050 4,420 58 Tiffin River Basin Ohio - - - 32 690 5,248 59 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 570 2,720 28,328 Basin 60 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 114 875 7,304 Basin 61 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 432 4,040 36,215 Basin 62 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 24 1,220 10,067 Basin 63 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 20 1,110 14,149 Basin 64 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 117 1,210 17,034 Basin 65 St. Joseph River Ohio - - - 114 1,020 14,916 Basin 66 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 144 970 8,931 River Basin 67 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 143 845 6,844 River Basin 68 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 73 823 7,243 River Basin 69 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 73 801 6,967 River Basin 94 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Erie Southwest Planning Subarea 4.2 (continued) 70 Middle Maumee Ohio - 14 705 4,880 River Basin 71 Middle Maumee Ohio - 14 650 4,266 River Basin 72 Middle Maumee Ohio - 29 542 6,813 River Basin 73 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 178 1,110 11,233 River Basin 74 Middle Maumee Ohio - - - 177 978 9,146 River Basin 75 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 196 1,760 25,289 76 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 194 1,520 20,041 77 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 188 1,630 20,317 78 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 148 748 7,611 79 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 144 733 5,340 80 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 83 714 4,297 81 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 78 660 4,604 82 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 77 1,100 8,133 83 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 76 872 6,292 84 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 71 1,250 9,698 85 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 69 1,080 8,164 86 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 69 994 7,059 87 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 58 799 6,261 88 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 36 528 5,064 89 Lower Maumee Basin Ohio - - - 34 729 4,726 Latitude Longitude 90 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 55' 30" 830 20' 30" 225 801 6,199 91 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 53' 830 22' 206 1,090 8,592 92 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 40' 51' 830 22' 30" 200 1,630 15,282 93 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 48' 830 21' 30" 170 1,660 17,829 94 Tymochtee Creek Ohlo 400 48' 830 21' 30" 149 1,150 11,446 95 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 45' 83' 23' 141 646 6,014 96 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 42' 830 24' 129 1,520 11,538 97 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 41' 830 24' 128 1,380 9,850 98 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 40'- 30" 830 23' 30" 62.1 941 6,076 99 Sandusky Ohio 400 51' 830 15' 300 1,860 29,336 100 Sandusky Ohio 400 43' 830 16' 286 1,640 20,560 101 Sandusky Ohio 400 47' 830 14' 284 2,410 33,172 102 Sandusky Ohio 400 46' 830 14' 280 4,530 57,966 103 Sandusky Ohio 400 46' 830 13' 280 4,360 53,363 104 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 47' 830 10' 89.2 914 9,666 105 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 48' 830 09' 30" 87.5 644 5,892 106 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 49' 830 09' 31.0 625 7,518 107 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 50' 830 09' 79.7 860 11,385 108 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 50' 830 07' 68.5 682 8,991 109 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 51' 830 05' 66.5 790 6,935 110 Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 51' 830 04' 61.5 1,570 13,440 ill Broken Sword Creek Ohio 400 52' 830 03' 59.8 1,270 9,758 112 Sandusky Ohio 400 45' 30" 830 08' 30" 117 876 14,637 113 Sandusky Ohio 400 46' 830 05' 104 519 4,572 114 Sandusky Ohio 40' 46' 830 04' 30" 100 731 8,991 115 Sandusky Ohio 400 46' 830 04' 99.7 599 6,628 116 Sandusky Ohio 400 47' 83' 03' 96.3 659 7,672 117 Sandusky Ohio 400 49' 30" 820 55' 78.3 3,260 44,894 118 Tributary Sandusky Ohio 400 50' 82' 53' 30" 70.4 821 9,574 119 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 400 57' 83' 18' 291 2,970 40,076 120 Tymochtee Creek Ohio 4010 56' 30" 830 18' 30" 261 2,060 26,728 Reservoir Sites 95 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion shi Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Latitude Longitude Lake Erie Southwest Planning Subarea 4.2 (continued) 121 Little Tymochtee Ohio 400 56' 830 19, 31.0 543 5,800 Creek 122 Honey Creek Ohio 410 03' 830 101 169 820 17,829 123 Honey Creek Ohio 410 03' 30" 820 55' 83.1 1,780 10,004 124 Sandusky Ohio 410 041 830 12' 772 7,350 100,466 125 Sandusky Ohio 410 031 830 121 770 6,750 87,148 126 Sandusky Ohio 41 0 01, 830 12' 765 5,810 67,693 127 Sandusky Ohio 400 54' 830 14' 30" 337 1,810 23,475 128 Sandusky Ohio 400 53' 830 14' 314 1,960 26,329 129 Sandusky Ohio 400 52' 830 15' 30" 312 1,650 20,866 130 Rock Ohio 410 041 830 061 25.1 625 6,475 131 Armstrong & Biegly Ohio 410 05' 830 04' 30" 16.8 619 5,523 132 e St. Marys Ohio - 0 - 118 13,440 130,175 133 e Auglaize Ohio 410 14' 84 24' 2,329 1,240 9,800 134 e Maumee Ohio - - - 600 - 135 e Maumee Ohio - - - 2,100 - 136 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 355.0 1,100 3,050 137 Huron River.Basin Ohio - - 86.6 857 1,900 138 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 244.0 578 1,640 139 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 123.0 1,500 2,840 140 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 123.0 1,380 2,530 141 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 122.0 1,220 2,100 142 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 121.0 1,100 1,790 143 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 97.3 844 1,620 144 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 93.5 577 870 145 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 93.1 709 1,230 146 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 87.7 612 1,200 147 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 87.4 541 980 148 Huron River Basin Ohio - - 86.3 512 920 149 Vermilion River Ohio - - 261.0 853 3,440 Basin 150 Vermilion River Ohio - - 250.0 576 1,970 Basin 151 Vermilion River Ohio - - 242.0 1,180 4,540 Basin 152 Vermilion River Ohio - - 33.8 516 1,420 Basin 153 Vermilion River Ohio - - 206.0 792 3,710 Basin 154 Vermilion River Ohio - - 204.0 706 3,050 Basin 155 Vermilion River Ohio - - 201.0 1,570 3,790 Basin 156 Vermilion River Ohio - - 198.0 1,940 4,160 Basin 157 Vermilion River Ohio - 183.0 1,690 3,640 Basin 158 Vermilion River Ohio - 178.0 1,190 2,150 Basin 159 Vermilion River Ohio - - 178.0 1,060 1,820 Basin 160 Vermilion River Ohio - - 36.8 585 920 Basin 161 Vermilion River Ohio - - 139.0 632 990 Basin 162 Vermilion River Ohio - - 127.0 706 610 Basin 163 Vermilion River Ohio - - 114.0 717 1,030 Basin 96 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Dam Location Drainage Pond Storage Index Sec- Town- Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State tion ship Range (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft)' Lake Erie Southwest Planning Subarea 4.2 (continued) Latitude Longitude 164 Vermilion River Ohio 108.0 1,130 1,420 Basin 165 Vermilion River Ohio 105.0 1,960 2,000 Basin 166 Vermilion River Ohio 24.7 949 970 Basin Lake Erie Central Planning Subarea 4.3 1 Conneaut Creek Ohio 410 54' 800 38' 165 725 21,296 2 Conneaut Creek Ohio 410 53' 800 37' 160 1,160 43,114 3 Conneaut Creek Ohio 410 54' 800 33' 156 970 22,861 4 Ashtabula Ohio 410 50' 800 44' 113 4,500 70,578 5 Ashtabula Ohio 410 51' 800 42' 30" 93.7 995 16,540 6 Ashtabula Ohio 410 51' 80' 40' 91.6 800 11,415 7 Ashtabula Ohio 410 51' 800 39' 90.2 675 9,267 8 Rock Creek Ohio 410 36' 800 49' 68.5 4,300 30,993 9 Grand Ohio 410 22' 800 59' 27.0 570 7,303 10 Aurora Creek Ohio 410 25' 810 25' 57.2 956 20,800 11 Aurora Creek Ohio 410 23' 30" 810 24' 50.8 820 19,500 12 Aurora Creek Ohio 410 22' 81' 22' 30" 30.3 548 15,400 13 Chagrin Ohio 410 37' 30" 810 24' 30" 247 2,890 110,500 14 East Br. Chagrin Ohio 410 37' 30" 810 23' 50.4 1,200 43,400 15 East Br. Chagrin Ohio 410 37' 30" 810 22' 30" 45.6 1,000 36,700 0 0 16 East Br. Chagrin Ohio 410 37' 30" 810 21' 30" 41.5 859 37,500 17 East Br. Chagrin Ohio 410 36' 81 17' 24.2 1,070 35,500 18 East Br. Chagrin Ohio 410 34' 30" 81' 18' 30" 20.7 731 15,940 19 Chagrin Ohio 41 35' 810 24' 30" 179 2,070 82,100 20 Chagrin Ohio 410 33' 810 25' 172 1,420 43,900 21 Chagrin Ohio 410 30' 30" 810 24' 30" 158 1,625 53,700 22 Chagrin Ohio 410 29: 30" 810 24' 155 1,380 45,100 23 Tributary of Ohio 410 27 810 23' 57.5 918 21,300 Chagrin 0 24 Tributary of Ohio 41 28' 81' 21' 30" 55.0 1,390 29,700 Chagrin 25 Tributary of Ohio 410 28' 810 20' 12.0 766 17,400 Chagrin 26 Cuyahoga Ohio 410 25' 30" 810 09' - 3,860 46,430 27 West Br. of Ohio 410 28' 30" 810 ill 26.4 2,320 33,430 Cuyahoga 0 28 West Br. of Ohio 41 30' 810 10' 22.1 3,250 41,300 Cuyahoga 0 29 Congress Lake Ohio 410 8' 30" 81 16' 30" 60.7 5,200 61,600 Outlet 0 oil 0 30 Congress Lake Ohio 41 81 16' 15.5 917 8,320 Outlet 31 Cuyahoga Ohio 410 14' 30" 810 18' 184 5,620 61,540 32 Tributary of Ohio 410 15' 810 16' 177 5,000 51,960 Cuyahoga 0 0 33 Tributary of Ohio 41 16' 81 14' 30" 169 7,930 95,070 Cuyahoga 0 34 Cuyahoga Ohio 41 21' 30" 810 091 30" 136 11,240 141,500 0 0 35 Bridge Creek Ohio 410 25' 81 10, 39.3 1,560 10,190 36 Bridge Creek Ohio 41 24' 30" 810 11' 27.8 1,400 18,170 0 0 37 Cuyahoga Ohio 410 14' 81 33' 520 4,390 173,200 38 Furnace Run Ohio 410 12' 30" 810 35' 30" 14.5 713 41,900 39 Furnace Run Ohio 410 13' 810 35' 30" 13.1 511 280700 40 Mud Branch Ohio 410 09, 810 31' 30" 25.8 979 7,230 41 Mud Branch Ohio 41 OV 30" 810 30' 24.5 2,280 20,620 Reservoir Sites 97 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Drainage Pond Storage Index Dam Location Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State Latitude Longitude (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Erie Central Planning Subarea 4.3 (continued) 0 42 Cuyahoga Ohio 41 0 22' 81" 37' 703 5,060 232,100 43 Tinkers Creek Ohio 41 0 23' 810 31' 84.5 967 14,050 44 Tributary of Ohio 41 22' 810 28' 30" 67.3 1,500 19,620 Tinkers Creek 45 Tributary of Ohio 410 17' 810 24' 30" 416 4,920 45,830 Tinkers Creek 46 Cuyahoga Ohio 41 0 19, 810 35' 30" 590 5,890 289,400 47 e Bridge Creek Ohio 41 0 24' 810 12' 27.8 1,500 18,110 48 e Cuyahoga Ohio 41 0 11' 810 20' 207 769 7,060 49 e Little Cuyahoga Ohio 41 0 4' 810 22' 14.3 900 6,900 50 Black River Basin Ohio - - 170.0 540 330 51 Black River Basin Ohio - - 163.0 743 640 52 Black River Basin Ohio - - 160.0 874 750 53 Black River Basin Ohio - - 129.0 1,390 1,750 54 Black River Basin Ohio - - 90.6 794 850 55 Black River Basin Ohio - - 81.8 781 910 56 Black River Basin Ohio - - 36.8 664 1,250 57 Black River Basin Ohio - - 29.3 617 1,220 58 Black River Basin Ohio - - 29.0 685 1,360 59 Black River Basin Ohio - - 28.4 524 870 60 Black River Basin Ohio - - 28.0 676 1,250 61 Black River Basin Ohio - - 25.9 527 890 62 Black River Basin Ohio - - 185.0 500 830 63 Black River Basin Ohio - - 170.0 722 680 64 Black River Basin Ohio - - 167.0 1,400 1,670 65 Black River Basin Ohio - - 156.0 1,310 1,210 66 Black River Basin Ohio - - 74.6 665 710 67 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 289.0 2,380 12,460 68 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 62.5 1,150 2,400 69 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 58.5 1,420 3,190 70 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 58.3 1,870 4,520 71 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 56.6 1,580 3,350 72 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 52.4 1,320 2,560 73 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 48.0 1,050 1,860 74 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 47.3 930 1,490 75 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 42.7 517 590 76 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 147.0 619 500 77 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 146.0 1,040 1,050 78 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 139.0 924 910 79 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 124.0 776 900 80 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 117.0 816 1,730 81 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 28.5 863 930 82 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 15.4 1,120 1.460 83 Rocky River Basin Ohio - - 22.7 532 1,020 Lake Erie East Planning Subarea 4.4 County Town I Cattaraugus Creek Arcade Center, N.Y. Wyoming Arcade 24.9 1,020 32,000 2 South Br.Cattarau- Otto, N.Y. Cattaraugus Otto 64.5 4,450 150,000 gus Creek 3 Cattaraugus Creek Springville, N.Y. Erie and Concord & 225 3,770 255,000 Cattaraugus Ashford 4 Cattaraugus Creek Zoar, N.Y. Erie and Collins & 317.9 2,600 203,000 Catraraugus Otto 5 Clear Creek Bagdad, N.Y. Erie Collins 20.0 370 9,000 6 Tonawanda Creek Alabama Ponds, N.Y. Genesee & Alabama & 2,800 Niagara Royalton 7 Cayuga Creek Bennington, N.Y. Wyoming Bennington 32.0 610 26,500 98 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites map Drainage Pond Storage Index Dam Location Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State County Town (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Erie East Planning Subarea 4.4 (continued) 8 Little Tonawanda Linden, N.Y. Genesee Bethany - 920 22,900 Creek 91 Ellicott Creek Sandridge, N.Y. Erie Alden 33.4 1,400 20,400 10 Tonawanda Creek Sierks, N.Y. Wyoming Attica 61.3 810 36,200 11 Cazenovia Creek Spring Brook, N.Y. Erie Elma 121.0 1,590 67,000 12 Buffalo Creek Wales, N.Y. Erie Wales 77.9 1,320 49,000 Lake Ontario West Planning Subarea 5.1 1 Black Creek No. 7-2, N.Y. Allegany Birdsall 15.7 1,720 37,700 2 Jaycox Creek No. 15-2, N.Y. Livingston Geneseo 10.0 720 6,450 3 Conesus Inlet No. 16-4, N.Y. Livingston Conesus 16.1 710 9,450 4 Honeoye Inlet No. 17-5, N.Y. Ontario Canadice & 18.0 1,100 9,000 Richmond 5 Gates Creek No. 17-12, N.Y. Ontario West 17.0 500 9,250 Bloomfield 6 Angelica Creek Angelica, N.Y. Allegany Angelica 54 1,590 28,800 7 Genesee Belfast, N.Y. Allegany Belfast 578 1,800 48,000 8 Oatka Creek Oatka, N.Y. Monroe Wheatland 161 860 44,500 9 Genesee Portage, N.Y. Livingston Portage & 985 4,100 124,000 & Wyoming Genesee Falls 10 Genesee Stannard, N.Y. Allegany Willing 168 1,280 39,000 11 Keshequa Creek Tuscarora, N.Y. Livingston Mount Morris 69 �40 42,000 12 Wiscoy Creek Wiscoy, N.Y. Allegany Hume 108 900 43s2OO 13 e Canadice Outlet Canadice Lake, N.Y. Ontario Canadice 12.6 640 - 14 e Conesus Creek Conesus Lake, N.Y. Livingston Livonia 69.8 3,200 - 15 e Hemlock Outlet Hemlock, N.Y. Livingston Livonia 43.0 1,860 - 16 e Caneadea Creek Rushford Lake, N.Y. Allegany Caneadea 61.0 580 - 17 e Silver Lake Outlet Silver Lake, N.Y. Wyoming Castile 17.7 770 - 18 e Honeoye Creek Honeoye Lake, N.Y. Ontario Richmond 41.1 1,790 - 19 e Genesee Mount Morris, N.Y. Livingston Leicester 1,077 3.680 337,000 Lake Ontario Central Planning Subarea 5.2 1e Salmon Salmon Res., N.Y. Osweg(? Orwell 191 2,640 - 2 Limestone Creek New York Onondaga Pompey 46.8 1,420 37,000 3 Virgil Creek New York Cortland Virgil 14.0 475 11,250 4 Chittenango Creek New York Madison Nelson 25.0 1,150 19,800 5 Mad New York Oneida Florence 22.8 920 18,200 6 Sucker Brook New York Lewis High Market 7.7 550 13,150 7 East Br.Fish Creek New York Lewis High Market 30.5 600 23,100 8 East Br.Fish Creek New York Lewis High Market 41.3 1,000 33,000 9 Point Rock Creek New York Lewis Lewis 14.1 770 12sOOO 10 Florence Creek New York Oneida Florence 6.1 610 18,200 11 Caughdenoy Creek New York Oswego Hastings 13.6 1,460 12,300 12 Black Creek New York Wayne Galen 14.6 780 5,530 13 Mud Creek Bristol Center, N.Y. Ontario Bristol 22.5 560 10,100 14 West New York Yates Middlesex 38.5 1,020 26,200 15 Kashong Creek New York Yates Benton 5.5 790 12,800 16 Black Br. New York Seneca 'Waterloo 7.2 1,170 2,160 17 Kendig Creek New York Seneca Fayette 12.8 1,270 16,650 is Brook Creek New York Seneca Junius 6.0 550 6,050- 19 Red Creek New York Seneca Varick 3.5 610 3,060 20 Fall Creek New York Cayuga Summerhill 20.3 940 16,200 21 Salmon Creek New York Cayuga Lansing 81.4 1,000 65,000 22 Muskrat Creek New York Cayuga Cato 23.4 2,760 21,800 23 North Brook New York Cayuga Throop 11.3 544 4,320 24 Owasco Inlet Trib. New York Tompkins Groton 4.0 260 1,550 25 Bear Swamp Creek New York Cayuga Niles 7.5 960 31,100 Reservoir Sites 99 TABLE 2-5(continued) Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites Map Drainage Pond Storage Index Dam Location Area Area Capacity Number River Name or State County Town (sq mi) (ac) (ac-ft) Lake Ontario Central Planning Subarea 5.2 (continued) 26 Flint Creek New York Yates Potter 26.0 980 20,700 27 e Canandaigua Outlet Canandaigua Lake, N.Y. Ontario Canandaigua 189 10,600 - 28 e Seneca Cayuga Lake, N.Y. Cayuga & Aurelius & 1,587 42,500 - Seneca Seneca Falls 29 e Chittenango Creek Cazenovia, N.Y. Madison Cazenovia 9 1,060 - 30 e Limestone Creek De Ruyter Res., N.Y. Cortland & Cuyler & 19 560 - Madison De Ruyter 31 e Keuka Outlet Keuka Lake, N.Y. Yates Penn Yan 179 11,200 - 32 e Oneida Oneida Lake, N.Y. Oswego West Monroe 1,377 51,100 33 e Ninemile Creek Otisco Lake, N.Y. Onondaga Spafford, 45 2,200 - Otisco 34 e Owasco Outlet Owasco Lake, N.Y. Cayuga Auburn 204 6,650 - 35 e Seneca Seneca Lake, N.Y. Seneca Fayette & 714 42,700 - Waterloo 36 e Skaneateles Skaneateles Lake, N.Y. Onondaga Skaneateles 75.8 8,840 - Lake Ontario East Planning Subarea 5.3 1 Oswegatchie High Rock, N.Y. St.Lawrence Fine 66 6,800 240,000 2 Oswegatchie Richville, N.Y. St.Lawrence De Kalb 841 16,100 624,000 3 Oswegatchie Talcville, N.Y. St.Lawrence Edwards 338 4,400 148,000 4 Greenwood Creek Pitcairn, N.Y. St.Lawrence Pitcairn 30 2,000 46,000 5 e Oswegatchie Cranberry Lake, N.Y. St.Lawrence Clifton 144 7,080 58,000 6 e Indian River Trib. Lake Bonaparte, N.Y. Lewis Diana 22 1,390 2,100 7 Elm Creek Elm Cr Diversion,N.Y. St.Lawrence Hermon 371 6,300 330,000 8 Harrison Creek Harrison Creek, N.Y. St.Lawrence Canton 422 2,900 74,000 9 Grass Clare, N.Y. St.Lawrence Russell 268 2,800 50,000 10 Little Pierrepont, N.Y. St.Lawrence Russell 19 2,000 45,000 11 Raquette & Jordan Jordan, N.Y. St.Lawrence Colton 830 24,000 745,000 12 So.Br. Grass & Irish Hill Diver- Franklin Clifton 1,042 14,400 273,000 Raquette sion, N.Y. 13 e Bog Lows Lake, N.Y. St.Lawrence Colton 36 2,160 23,000 14 e Raquette Tupper Lake, N.Y. St.Lawrence Piercefield 723 5,970 19,000 15 e Raquette Carry Falls Res., N.Y. St.Lawrence Colton 877 3,500 114,000 16 e Raquette Blake Falls Res., N.Y. St.Lawrence Parishville 907 660 3,900 17 e Raquette Rainbow Falls Res., St.Lawrence Colton 929 710 9,400 N.Y. 18 Black Forestport, N.Y. Oneida Boonville 237 11,700 512,000 19 Black Hawkinsville, N.Y. Oneida Boonville 265 10,000 450,000 20 So. Branch Moose Higley Mountain, N.Y. Herkimer Ohio 131 8,170 274,000 21 Middle Br. Moose Nelson Lake, N.Y. Herkimer Webb 148 2,150 71,500 22 So. Branch Moose Panther Mountain, N.Y. Herkimer Webb 200 4,250 410,000 23 Independence Sperryville, N.Y. Lewis Watson 85 2,660 65,000 24 e Middle Br. Moose First-Fifth Lake, N.Y. Herkimer Webb 52 3,260 20,600 25 e Black Forestport Res., N.Y. Oneida Forestport 144 640 4.900 26 e Middle Br. Moose Sixth-Seventh Lake, Hamilton Inlet 17 960 6,900 N.Y. 27 e South Branch Black South Lake, N.Y. Herkimer Ohio 6 500 9,700 28 e Beaver Stillwater Res., N.Y. Herkimer Webb 172 6,340 100,000 29 e Woodhull Creek Woodhull Lake, N.Y. Herkimer Webb 6.5 1,150 20,000 e Existing 100 Appendix 2 VICINITY #AAP SCALL IN MILis ow 10) cp C 00 K rand Marais a LAKE Chishoirn 0 Hibbing @,,aleth 7 0 SiNer Say 45 \L C) 3 Two Harbors APOsnE ISLANDS 6 Sayfield DLj&uth ST. UIS [email protected] ertor Ashia z I nwood CARLTON@ I- Pot 0 Fn S 0 z LU Z Isco 3: StAf DOUGLAS BAYFIELD CALEIN MILES S - -- 0 5 10 15 20 25 -SHLAND IRON LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE Y GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDAR STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES I EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES Co POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-80 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 1.1 Reservoir Sites 101 40 C. <) EENAW ISLE ROYALE a A KEWEENAW COUNTY 0 Ho,ghto, Portage Lake LAKE SUPERIOR Ontonagon Y.Ilo. D-9 .2 Marquette ew gebic Lake 2 Wakefield @p .hpemi u@e Ironwoo: HOUGHTON "A'RA A 9 uL ONTONAIC N EGOGE MIC4 I MARQUETTE w/scl /@A ALGER LAKE SUPERIOR o Heart. 1,,,o t Ste. Mane WHITEFISH BAY Mun, Ing Newb Try LUCE ALGER CHIPPEWA 'P. VICINITY MAP I ... D. SCALE IN MILES SCALE IIII MILES 0 5 IM 20 25 LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLI GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BNE OUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES ISLE ROYAL LA F Ing AL.ER 9 CITIES . EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C:11 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-81 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 1.2 102 Appendix 2 VICINITY MAP ..... SCAIE IN MILES 0% IRO Paint L. ke Michigarnme 'I'o. River RiYer 41cll/ DICKINSON WISC0 4fI L. pine /V 10 MENOM 0 Nor.a Popple Ton Mounta 10 FLORENCE P Cedar Esca aba ARINE 31: gj,el U L)ASHINGT N ISL NNOON I LA ANGLADE *r An igo 0 Men I ee M OMINEE Mart ette f- Oconto 9- 11@ DOOR Stur on Bay Shawano L ke Shawano 1@ Q SHAWANO OCONTO KEWAUNEE ntonvilleO Algoma Little oOUTA MIE Green Bay Waupaca De Pere I Ke*aEmee New London io ROWN WAUPACA @Wleton K ukauna MAN TOW C Mena,h, CA@@ Neenah TW. Rivers take Pygan I CALE IN MILES Manitowoc -E WAUS ARA Berlin Oshkosh Ch,lton 0 5 1 @0* WINNEBAGO FOND DU LAC S E YGA LEGEND 0 Ripon Green al"I' Fond du Lac 5h boy an Sheboygan PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE T ---- - GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY 0% -cLWt Ri,, STATE BOUNDARIES AR ETTE GREEN LAKE COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES cm. EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES CD2 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-82 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.1 Reservoir Sites 103 VICINITY MAP SCALE IN MILES 50 1. WASHINGTON OZAUKEE West Bend 0 Port Washington c,..k 0 Hartford Cedarburg 0Oconomowoc LEGEND Milwaukee PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY Waukesh? STATE BOUNDARIES 0 South Milwaukee COUNTY BOUNDARIES MILWAUKEE CITIES WAUKESHA Root EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES WALWORTH POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES Elkhorn Racine RACIF@ Kenosha SCALE IN MILES WIS -CO@SIN KENOSHA IF-5 10 15 20 ILLINOIS Zon OlHarvard -1 7 Waukegan 0 Marengo 0 Crystal Lake Lake Forest Highland Park 3@ McHENRY LAKE KANE 0 @ Elgin COOK Saint Charles 0 Chicago ICHIGAN n@@ OU PAGE INDIANA A.,.,a /.Met 0 Michigan City '56 Ca, I C./-M.t R chesterto 0, La Porte Joliet ift e C@I,ivil Chicago Heights @ ),a oa LA PORTE E) z Crown Point -1--) WILL PORTER 0 Knox LAKE STARKE M FIGURE 2-83 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.2 104 Appendix 2 MO7NCAL 78 KENT 110 84 47 41111 Sparta Gree Ville Rockford a SHIAWASSEE 42 Belding F 0 59AWA Ie( LINTON - _--n Its Grand Haven Gra,t 44 Walker G62 79 le I Owosso 111 Ionia sto, 0 C N 45 RaS77 41 eo reek St. IT -,@orunna to Low 12 30 02 Is 106 Durand W6&r: Hudsonvill 09 19 e $I Yet 0 ortland 28 s so 90 Z 1' 29 eeland L ... @P'6- IONIA 50 51,52 89 Holland ALLEGAN 1-64 ETAVY f@, 93 Grand Ledge Lansing 94 67 Hasti gs 74 37 Cedar -ka/0 1 1 34 17 38 35 9 Gun Lake 105 7 '133'.11 32 ason1.16 1 's -ha olte 0 ko GS ack loo Rive 26 aton Rapids Otsego Plainwell ON 107 INGH@M VAN BUREN AMAZOO e CALHOUN JAC N 4@ South Haven Kalamb rBattle Cree "756 98 31 IT It,vef lam azoo 24 Jackson 165 Pa. paw aw Paw 119 Marsha I Albion o Michiga Center 122 132 140 Oortage 57 139 0 0 127 S. o Benton rbor 111 3,124 128 161 62 so t-Josecth 164 1, CASS ST. OSEP 126 57 ANCH 1411 HILLSDALE 12, -0 r_t. Dow ac 14 118 129 152 142 hree Rivers .. 146 Cold ate 0 1Ils ale 211 Buchan L "o '63 55. C, ..es Sturg s BERRIEN MICHIGAN 590 TEUBE INDIANA 1.147 148 e -N MICHIGAN SUth0h143 49 0 Artga OHIO @'o Bend 35 Goshen -\ LAGRANGE ST. JOSEPH 14 Ligonie NOBLE -f- L KRT endailvilleo) Plymouth SCALE IN MILES VICINITY MAP 0 5 10 15 20 25 ... SCALE IN M!LES t. 0 so 100 LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C)o POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-84 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.3 Reservoir Sites 105 SCHOOLCRA OM..Wique Lake DELTA ACKINAC 4 0 ""'oue SL ICe kinac Island ladston 4, & Straits of mwki@ Bois al. c Wand j Escanaba A Beaver Island Charlevoix MMET .P Lak Charlevoix ne North Manito, Island IV b 9L. VV( #, South Manitou Island S Glen r-ch Lake ANTRIM Isle LIELANAU BENZIE T erse City 0 Frankfort Crystal Lake GRAND TRAVERSE KALKAS MISSAUKEE Higgins Lake LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE P.mt.g. GREAT LAKE$ DRAINAGE BOUNDARY Lake Ho,ght.4k 7 Lake Cad 11 C E Z@ -Ilk-10", - STATE BOUNDARIES Manistee MANISTE C . d i I I ac COUNTY BOUNDARIES 1"V, 0 CITIES WE ORD ROSCOMMON EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C)3 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES S.bl- Rive, -tie Lud.ngt.n pe, VICINITY MAP MASO N 8--^^ LAKE OSCEOLA, '..r. -Al E IN .'I I s 0 1. 1. Big ap s OCEANA MECOSTA F,erri.rtt eh.11 10 NEWAYGO Muskegon SCALE IN MILES 0 5 10 15 20 25 FIGURE 2-85 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 2.4 106 Appendix 2 0 50 Im Pine Ri,a, 0@ CHIPPEWA MACKINAC eo arp DRUMMOND 0 ISLAND St. 1@7ce Mackinac Wand STRAIT$ OF MACKINAC Bois Blanc Island --J Cheboygan Wack SurtLak Mullet Lake take Rogers City 0 lp0 V. 4D Grand Lake CHEBOYGAN PRESQUE ISLE Long take S h..d Alpena Thunder Say el OTSEGO MONTMORENCY ALPENA 5 Hubbard Lake Ao Sable Grayling SO CRAWFORD OSCOOA ALCONA 10SCO Oscoda SCALE IN MILES Au Q TawasoCity East Ta.as 0 5 10 15 20 T LEGEND OGEMAW PLANNIING SUBAREA OUTLINE ARENAC GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY Rine Ri@' STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES C TIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES SAGINAW SAY 00 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-86 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 3.1 Reservoir Sites 107 L A K E HURON Port Aust, Z Cast;vIlle AF CLARE 10 RjYe' It, GLADWIN a Harbor Beach Clare Bad Axe SAGINAW SAY Rive, HURON Chippe Midland Ess xville 0 Mount Pleasant 5 .1 Bay city It" 3z 4 MIDLAND BAY o" Car.* Alryt St. Louis 28 tIt! Rive, Saginaw Vassar .Ithaca TUSCOLA Chesaning 20 1 Iz TIOT -SAGINAW e Mount Morris 14 3 Flint Flustong Lapeer ss. Swartz Creek 17 13 Durand LAPEER GENESEE 34 35 6 Fient O"n 4.tHolly p 42. 41 41 HOV SCALE IN MILES L r@2@ 15 20 VICINITY MAP lr- o@ It I s LEGEND 0 10 to, PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY to, STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C:@D POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-87 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 3.2 108 Appendix 2 7r, Kr VICINITY MAP SCAI-E IN M!LES o Iw 70 S, Z SANILAC 44 4 IA Port uron ST. CLAIR OAKLAND MACOMB o --- 0 P 14 St. Clair 4;1 Holly LIVINGSTON Romeo Richmond 2 2A 't)Lake Orion ,R chester Marine City 0 New Baltimore. 0 Pontiac 0 Howell % 0i A-hor ll@y Algonac Mt Clernen M" ord se 42 C' o- 39 35Q 1110@1 0 0 41 o rj WA NE o Q Plymouth 0 Detr I 01"o- LAKE ST. CLAIR 40 D elsea 3 42 54 nn or Yosi lant. 54E 53E ? WASHt`ENAW 52 27 Rock IVII 00 0 Tecumseh 19". SCALE IN MILES s CI 2 vlo-I ro Monroe 0 5 10 15 Adrian"' 0 Huct n 26 LEGEND Blissfield PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES -A \.LENAWEE _M16HIGAN MONROE COUNTY BOUNDARIES OHIO CITIES I EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C)3 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-88 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.1 Reservoir Sites 109 4 95 Z3 LAKE ERIE I I ICHIGAN enmile C.. miumee, Bay a 3 OHIO , .4f .6. tpel" ..,89 LUCA rq,7s Toledo @j Kellys Island FU@TON 88a850- OTTAWA f> LLIA 5 52 712 cus Port Clint Sandusky Bay Or-<AL 5 070 10 " a 5 , ,1 6SV7 6 0 DEFIANCE 7maum Sandusky 149 45 Napoleo713 owling Gree Auburn so -4 0 '150 41 F emont- 51 Z-! 0 39 430 135E SA US Y M ERIE efianc 103ellev ;57 rviialk., 5 W D c ENRY Fo oria 1z Is. Paulding. P TNAM 14 14 Tiffin 4 146 164 River 25 '0- 4 PAULD11 Stan @26 123 1 1 Find ay 0 I'a rd 13 21 qFNrr.A I --I HURON Fort Wayin AN RT 1 0 CRAWFORD 66 _/WIRT 131 EN AL" 41 Carey Van We 28 ALLEN so 122 11 9' 10 -,_tqCOCK 92 10 0IP s2 9 9 11 140 Up er :cy, 29 ,we River n"Sk 76 Qi-n is Ada s 1115 -cD 4 8 6Lima 30 T -j ADAMS is 9 099 MERCER ALAIZE 19 ap onet Celina 21, 20 21 .23, St. rys SCALE IN MILES 0 5 10 15 20 25 VICINITY MAP LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE 01. GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES CDO POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES to' FIGURE 2-89 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.2 110 Appendix 2 VVZQ;@L 9 nneaut C n 8 o Ashtabula 1 2 T rn 4 5 6. z o Geneva z IL 0 cn Grand Ri,er . Fairport Harbor Painesville Jefferson z 41 LAKE 'k > ji@ .3 19 a In ASHTABULAJ *27 Lorain land 22 25 Q 26 o Black River tA 5 47 Elyria Ga so 1. 42 GEAUGA 17 111@ 62 T 52 46 (Ob.rli. 75 uYAH OGA C, 5 45t 5 5 63 iR 32 3930 31 01 65 48 56 57 0 Wellington 4 41 29 Ravenna 58 1. Medina o"i 61 LORAIN Akron .9 MEDINA 3o 'ORTAGE SCALE IN MILES r2m!! 1-0 15 VICINITY MAP LEGEND -Ir 1. .!'Is PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES CD@ POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES 0 FIGURE 2-90 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.3 Reservoir Sites 111 LAKE ONTARIO NIAGARA Lockport Niag ra Fa s da reek ona.an Grand I and I Ilicott C" S Buffalo E 9 ancas 12 C' < 6 EasItlAur a Hamburg 0. 0- 4 'j us r 80 Dunkirk Springville (Y' 0 a ERIE Fredonia We tfield z Presque Isle 0 Salamanca Erie Cn @ Jamestown z 9 Olean Iz z . Lu CHAUTAUQUA NEWYORK CATTARAUGUS (L I - -j - - 0 F- PENNSYLVANIA z 0 Corry U.1 ERIE Union City 0 a. SCALE IN MILES su@.@ VICINITY MAP 0 5 10 15 20 c..... SCALE IN 0 so Im LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY -LL STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES Co POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-91 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 4.4 112 Appendix 2 L A K E 0 N T A R 1 0 Cie C% 0 lof@ State Barge Can,/ 0Albion Rochester Medina Brockport Lewiston Lockport ORLEANS Niagara Falls ack cleek F irp@o Grand Tonawanda Island 0 OBatavia 0 MONROE LIViNGSTON GENESEE Conesw 15 Lake Warsaw 8 C, 3 lock 4 17 Lake Mono* 0 LoIke N Q1 19 s Dansvilleo WYOMING ALLEGANY Q@2 16 13 VICIN)TY MAP 7 oCS SCALE IN M!LES L 0 50 Im I- -.0 Wellsville 'o NEWYORK PENNSYLVANIA LEGEND PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY SCALE IN MILES STATE BOUNDARIES t!@ COUNTY BOUNDARIES 0 5 10 15 CITIES am EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES CDO POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-92 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.1 Reservoir Sites 113 /,7 Creek MCrmk OSWEGO 0 0 Oswego 9 10 Camden Fulton WAY. r 0 Oneid. take W Rome Baldwinsville 22 U ica S.4 C@ycle San, nace nace nace 1. Bar nace Oneida* yracuse P y,a ns ONT 10 N.-I, Sene a Falls ONOND A Cazenovia anandaigua 35 2 4 HERKIMER Vale 29 Gene I a ONEIDA 17 Sk- J, L.k -Hamilton C.-ndaig.a 1\ C.y.ga Owa 0. Lake 9 Lake Lake YATES MADISON II Senoca Penn Yan L.k. 21 ,J>26 5, CAYU @4 SENECA Keuka Lake Ithaca atliris Glen TOMPKINS SCHUYLER SCALE IN MILES 5 10 15 20 VICINITY MAP LEGEND ..... SCIIE 11 MILES PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE 0 50 Im GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES J CIT ES IE I EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES C)3 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-93 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.2 114 Appendix 2 Massena 41, S 0 Ogdensburg C@ Potsdam Canton " Black a "' -9 17 Lake - -1 1? 2 16 SN. 9 19 Gouverneur 15 3 12 19 el Tuppert-ak Cranberry L ke cz' '4 1@p r2tCE Old ST L_p.,WW-,qlqCE Watertown 13 arthage Bea-er 28 Reservoir Raquette Lake LAKE L-ville 23 Fulton Lakes ONTAWO JEFFERSON 24 26 21 22 2 Ifs 25 111 SCALE IN MILES VICINITY MAP 0 5 10 15 20 SCALE IN MILES Q 5o Iw LEGEND ..'o. PLANNING SUBAREA OUTLINE GREAT LAKES DRAINAGE BOUNDARY STATE BOUNDARIES COUNTY BOUNDARIES 7i CITIES EXISTING RESERVOIR SITES D.- CD3 POTENTIAL RESERVOIR SITES FIGURE 2-94 Reservoir Site Map, Planning Subarea 5.3 Reservoir Sites 115 TABLE2-6 Number of Existing and Potential Reservoir Sites with Surface Area Less Than 500 Acres Planning Number of Number of Subarea Potential Sites Existing Sites 1.1 8 11 1.2 5 6 2.1 23 117 2.2 2 --- 2.3 98 218 2.4 21 128 3.1 20 82 3.2 20 81 4.1 152 168 4.2 293 25 4.3 89 --- 4.4 71 --- 5.1 122 5.2 173 --- 5.3 1 4 Section 7 RIVER FLOW AND FLOOD FORECASTING 7.1 General Early flood warnings allow time for resi- dents to leave low-lying areas and to move Individual river basins vary in size, topog- personal property, mobile equipment, and raphy, soil, ground cover, and climate, and livestock to higher ground. Sometimes valu- may have engineering works such as dredged able crops can be harvested in advance of a channels and dams that affect the flow of water. destructive flood. Emergency and relief or- Hydrologists design individual procedures for ganizations can prepare to handle refugees each river system and revise these procedures and to combat the inevitable health hazards as natural and man-made alterations affect caused by floods. stream channels and basins. Flood warnings can be issued hours to days Forecast procedures are designed by study- in advance of the flood peak on major ing the past history of each stream and the tributaries. Main river flood forecasts can be relationships of storm, melting snow, soil, and issued as far as several days or even weeks in river conditions to floods. Through these advance. In general, the time lapse between analyses, hydrologists develop river forecast- rainfall or snowmelt and the rise in river ing procedures for predicting the amount of height increases with the size of the river. water that will find its way into rivers and Before adequate procedures were developed streams and the time it will take to reach them for estimating runoff from storm rainfall, the under different conditions of temperature, soil river forecaster was forced to wait until the moisture, and precipitation. end of the storm and could not issue specific River forecasting methods vary for each forecasts until some of the upstream points in part of a river system. For the headwaters, the river system had crested. Runoff esti- early forecasts and warnings are based on mates now make it possible to prepare flood radar observations and measured rainfall. To warnings as the storm progresses, so that forecast for points on major tributaries, forecasts are much more timely. hydrologists project headwater and precipita- In small headwater areas subject to flash tion forecasts downstream. Stages on the floods, the crest of a flood may occur less than main stem of the river are predicted by com- an hour after the end of flood-producing rains. bining all tributary forecasts and computing In such a situation, warnings are practical the time it will take the water to reach the only when based directly on rainfall and esti- forecast points. Normally associated with mates of resultant runoff. Very often in such flood-warning procedures, river forecasting situations, procedures must be developed can also be of value when dealing with other which would shorten the normal time- water management problems such as drought consuming steps in the forecast procedures flows. The subjects of low-flow forecasting and and produce warnings in minimal time. Radar the need for additional stream gaging stations offers possibilities in this case, calling atten- to record low-now data are discussed further tion to areas currently receiving heavy rain in Section 8, Recommendations. and aiding in its evaluation. For larger drainage areas the time required to prepare forecasts is not generally as critical 7.2 Flood Warnings as for small headwater areas. This is particu- larly true for general rains of relatively uni- Flood warnings are forecasts of impending form distribution in time and area. In this floods and are distributed to the public by situation, much of the value of river forecasts radio and television and through local lies in making possible the evacuation of prop- emergency forces. Careful preparation and erty before the flood strikes. prompt response will reduce property loss and There are cases when local inflow is an im- insure personal safety. portant factor. Even at points well 117 118 Appendix 2 downstream on a major river system, floods 7.4 National Weather Service Great Lakes may occur within a few hours after the end of River and Flood Forecast Program heavy rains. When the river stage has become high and nearly stationary, it is possible that a The National Weather Service of the Na- heavy rain in a portion of the drainage area tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- immediately above a forecast point will cause tion provides river and flood forecasts for a rapid rise to critical stages. In this situation, selected portions of the Great Lakes drainage. the ability to estimate runoff is required to This service is confined to flood crest forecasts provide the needed forecasts. for these areas. Several river basins with flood hazards are not currently served by flood forecast programs. Table 2-7 summarizes 7.3 Operation of Water Control Structures river forecast points and hydrologic reporting stations. In addition to anticipating flows on uncon- The existing river and flood forecast ser- trolled streams, river forecasts are important vices are supported by Weather Surveillance for the efficient operation of any sort of water Radars (WSR-57) located at Weather Service control structure or water management pro- offices in Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, gram. Pittsburgh, and Buffalo. These facilities are A few water control structures are self- operated on a continuous basis and have the regulating, that is, they have fixed openings capability for detection and evaluation of pre- and require no manual operations. For such cipitation within a maximum radius of 125 structures, river forecasts have the same sig- nautical miles. The continuous radar observa- nificance as in uncontrolled streams, serving tions are an effective source of information for as warnings to those affected. Most water con- the issuance of flash flood warnings. Radar trol structures, however, require varying de- also photographically records precipitation grees of manual control. Most levee systems patterns at least every 15 minutes and more have many openings which must be closed as frequently during special situations. This rivers rise. If these closures are not made in provides recorded data over areas where rain time, the levee will not serve its intended pur- gage installations are impractical or nonexis- pose. Timely river forecasts are needed to give tent. In addition to the WSR-57 facilities, as much time as possible to make these clo- Weather Service local use radars supplement sures. This is particularly true in cases where the basic network at Cleveland, Ohio; Flint, floods occur only rarely and crews making the Michigan; Fort Wayne, Indiana; and Muske- closures are inexperienced. Conversely, river gon, Michigan. Observational data are also forecasts may indicate the river will stop ris- available from Air Force radars near Oscoda, ing before reaching stages requiring closure, Michigan; Duluth, Minnesota; and Marquette, and much work can be avoided. Michigan. Efficient operation of a dam with moveable The National Weather Service provides an gates is highly dependent upon accurate fore- automated Great Lakes Wind Forecast, an au- casts of inflow into the reservoir behind the tomated Great Lakes Storm Surge Forecast, dam. It is also necessary to have forecasts of and continuous weather broadcasts from river conditions downstream in order to selected sites. The wind forecasts are from a minimize the effect of releases from the dam numerical model used to forecast surface on critical points. This is particularly true for winds on Lakes Erie and Ontario out to 17 multipurpose dams intended for many uses hours. This forecast is used by boating in- such as flood control, generation of power, ir- terests and for the storm surge forecasts. The rigation, navigation, and pollution abate- automated Great Lakes Storm Surge Forecast ment. Flood control is most effective when the is a computer product that forecasts the de- reservoir is kept nearly empty, while most viation from normal of the lake levels. This other uses are best served by holding as much deviation, predicted for Buffalo, New York water as possible behind the dam. Such con- and Toledo, Ohio, extends out to 36 hours. The flicting interests create operational problems forecast is useful to shipping and power com- which can be handled effectively only with panies because abnormally high water causes forecast information. flooding, while abnormally low water affects River Flow and Flood Forecasting 119 harbor operations and hydroelectric genera- Applied to making weather-related deci- tion. sions, a 70-percent probability indicates a At certain locations, weather information 7-in-10 chance of precipitation, and a 3-in-10 and warnings are continuously broadcast 24 chance of no precipitation, at any location in hours a day. These VHF radio weather trans- the forecast area. A 30-percent probability missions repeat taped messages every 5 to 7 suggests only a 3-in-10 chance of precipitation. minutes. Tapes are revised and updated In general, the forecasts cover 12-hour periods periodically, usually every 3 to 6 hours. Mes- (sometimes refined after the first 6 hours) and sages include weather and radar summaries, moderate-sized metropolitan areas. Usually wind observations, visibility, lake conditions, no differentiation is made for. points within and detailed local and area forecasts. The the forecast area. transmissions are broadcast on FM frequen- The 'chance of a shower occurring in the area cies of 162.55 or 162.40 MHz. On the Great covered by the forecast is the product of two Lakes this service is provided from Sandusky, quantities: the probability that a precipita- Ohio (KHB-97), Cleveland, Ohio (KHB-59), tion-producing storm will develop or move and Chicago, Ill. (KWO-39). into the area, and the percent of the area which the storm is expected to cover. Thus, in the summer, when storms tend to be more iso- 7.5 National Weather Service Precipitation lated or scattered in nature, the probability Probability Forecast Program that an immediate area will get rain tends to be smaller than in winter. One of the most important facets of any Probabilities may be low any time of the river forecasting program is the prediction of year because the entire area covered by the future precipitation events. The best method forecast is not expected to be affected. For available today is provided by the National example, a forecaster can have a high degree Weather Service's precipitation probability of confidence (say 80 percent) that a storm will forecast. The probability forecast is intended move through the area, but that not all of the to elaborate the basic weather prediction, giv- area will be affected. Although he cannot pre- ing the user the benefit of the weatherman's dict exactly where precipitation will occur, he knowledge of the degree of uncertainty in the can read the weather patterns well enough to situation. In effect, the forecast translates the say that perhaps 40 percent of the area will be difference between a remote chance and a vir- affected. Here the product of storm probabil- tually sure thing into numerical terms. As ity (80 percent) and expected coverage (40 per- applied to precipitation forecasting, probabil- cent) is 32 percent, and the forecast will call for ity is the percentage chance that at least one a 30-percent chance of precipitation. Precipi- one-hundredth inch of precipitation (rain or tation is nearly certain, but the chance it will the liquid equivalent of snow or other frozen affect you, wherever you are in the forecast precipitation) will fall at any selected point in area, is only 3-in-10. Table 2-8 summarizes the the area and time period covered by the fore- range of National Weather Service probability cast. forecasts with qualifying limits. 120 Appendix 2 TABLE 2-7 River Forecast Points and Hydrologic Reporting Stations River Basin Planning River District Reporting Forecast or Area Subarea Office Location Stations Points Grand above Grand Ledge 2.3 Lansing, Mich. 9 6 Saginaw 3.2 Lansing, Mich. 18 9 Grand below Grand Ledge 2.3 Grand Rapids, Mich. 5 5 Maumee 4.2 Fort Wayne, Ind. 28 6 Vermilion 4.2 Akron, Ohio 3 1 Cuyahoga 4.3 Akron, Ohio 3 2 Chagrin 4.3 Akron, Ohio 3 1 Genesee 5.1 Rochester,-N.Y. 18 9 TABLE 2-8 Precipitation Probability Forecast Summary Forecast Forecaster's Precipitation Range of Probability Probabilities a (percent) (percent) Qualifying Forecast Meaning Near zero Less than 2 Usually no mention 1 of precipitation or less 2 2-5 5 5-8 10 8-15 20 15-25 Slight or small 2 chance 30 25-35 Chance 3 40 35-45 4 50 45-55 5 60 55-65 Likely 6 70 65-75 7 80 75-85 No qualifying forecast 8 90 85-95 term; precipitation 9 Near 100 95 or more virtually assured. aMeaning: Cases out of 10 in which at least 0.01 inch of precipitation will occur at any point in the forecast area within the forecast period. Section 8 RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 General a list of those gages needed to complete the present natural flow, principal streams net- The goals of the surface water hydrology works. appendix are threefold: first, to provide a good (1) Minnesota bibliography of surface water in the Great (a) St. Louis River below Embarrass Lakes Basin; second, to provide generalized River data and curves for use in preliminary plan- (b) Whiteface River below Meadow- ning studies; and third, to point out any lands shortcomings uncovered during preparation (c) St. Louis River below Flood River of the appendix, and thereby recommend fu- (2) Wisconsin ture studies that will provide more reliable (a) Fox River near Montello data. The following recommendations concern (b) Manitowoc River near Manitowoc both data collection and data analysis. (3) Michigan (a) Munuscong River near Kelden (b) Pine River near Rudyard 8.2 Data Collection (c) Whitefish River near Rapid River (d) Escanaba River near Arnold The U.S. Geological Survey has completed a (e) St. Joseph River near Mendon State-by-State analysis of the present surface (f) Manistee River near Sharon water data collection network. Evaluation of Needs for surface water data on the natural available streamflow data was made to pro- flow, principal streams networks of other vide guidelines for planning future water re- States in the Great Lakes Basin have been source programs. Basic steps in the evalua- met or are being filled by gages currently in tion procedure were: definition of the long- operation. There appears to be some need for term goals of the streamflow data program in gages on natural flow, minor stream net- quantitative form; examination and analysis works. For example, 17 additional gages have of all available data to determine which goals been recommended for minor streams in the have already been met; consideration of al- State of New York. ternate programs and techniques to meet the In addition, the Envirorimental Protec- remaining objectives; and preparation of a tion Agency has identified 14 sites where proposed program of data collection and streamflow data are not being collected, but analysis to meet the remaining objectives. are required for correlation with quality-of- Streamflow gages were grouped into four water data. These sites are shown in Table 2-9. categories: natural flow, minor streams; This program will generally fulfill the needs natural flow, principal streams; regulated of runoff determination throughout the Great flow, minor streams; and regulated flow, prin- Lakes Basin. However, additional gaging pro- cipal streams. The dividing line between a grams may be necessary to satisfy more minor and principal stream varies somewhat specific needs that can be satisfied with gag- from State to State, but a stream with a con- ing programs of shorter duration, perhaps 3 to tributing drainage area less than 500 square 5 years. An example concerns the runoff from miles is usually considered minor. Anything small watersheds. Recognizing the expertise larger would be termed a principal stream. of the Soil Conservation Service in the Accuracy goals and a discussion of gages to analysis of runoff from small watersheds, it is be included or excluded from each network are recommended that, under their leadership, presented in U.S. Geological Survey Open File additional studies be made to determine the Reports for each State. Additional gages have need and location for surface water gaging been recommended for both minor and princi- stations on watersheds of less than 250,000 pal natural stream networks. The following is acres in the Great Lakes Basin. 121 122 Appendix 2 8.3 Data Analysis (5) routing studies-the need to better de- scribe the movement of streamflow through a Many of the curves and much of the data river system is becoming more acute as presented in this appendix are generalized water-related studies are expanded to encom- and should be used for preliminary planning pass entire basins, with each basin having purposes only. Detailed analyses required to many potential sites for multipurpose storage. provide highly reliable data for all parts of the Because of the integrated operation required Great Lakes Basin are beyond the scope of this within a system of reservoirs, routing charac- appendix and in some cases are presently un- teristics for both high and low flows must be attainable. However, the following recom- more precisely defined using existing mendations are made for improving the basic techniques or by developing new techniques. data and methods included here in the event more precise studies are required. (1) frequency analysis of peak flows- projecting the magnitude of rare flood peaks, 8.4 Additional Hydrologic Research and De- based on given periods of record, is one of the velopment Required most important facets of surface water hydrol- ogy. However, no method has been developed Based on the unique hydrologic aspects of to date that is completely satisfactory when the Great Lakes Basin, additional research analyzing the rare occurrence. Continuing re- and development are recommended for appli- search efforts are needed in this area. In the cation to the following factors: meantime, studies should be undertaken to develop regional parameters for each hy- (1) peak flows valuate more precisely the drologic area in order to estimate peak runoff effects of topography and land management from ungaged streams. The factors which on peak flows should be considered in detail when develop- (2) low nows-determine: ing hydrologic frequency data for a specific (a) the most representative hydrologic problem area are regional skew coefficients, areas to be used in generalized low-flow regional volume-frequency information, and analyses impact of existing reservoirs. (b) the effect of ground water and (2) frequency analysis, low flows-low-flow streamflow components by percent periods have been studied for some time in (c) the most applicable method of fre- regard to water availability studies. However, quency analysis (analytical or graphical, skew the subject of low-flow analysis has recently coefficients, or zero flow occurrences) received more attention because of increased (d) the quantitative infiltration rates public awareness of water resource problems. for each hydrologic area To better assess the problems brought on by (e) drought indexes droughts and other low-flow periods, more in- (3) snowmelt runoff-using results of formation is needed. Hydrologic factors that snowmelt research for mountainous regions, must be considered when analyzing specific determine if and how they can be adapted to low-flow problem areas are regional low-flow the Great Lakes Basin. In addition, initiate curves through correlation, seasonal varia- research to investigate the peculiarities of the tions (climatic conditions), and forecast of Great Lakes Basin as they might affect droughts and low-flow periods. snowmelt runoff. (3) flow duration-further consideration (4) stream forecasting-future require- should be given to development of generalized ments of the National Weather Service River flow duration data for each hydrologic area and Flood Forecast program from the specific site information developed (a) expansion of the river and flood by the U.S. Geological Survey. forecast program to provide service to the re- (4) storage yield-the primary recommen- maining areas with flood hazards dation concerning storage yield studies would (b) development of continuous flow be to analyze existing data in the Great Lakes forecasts for selected rivers for water quality Basin using one of the statistical methods now and quantity management available. Other recommendations include (c) Great Lakes inflow-outflow fore- development of a more refined accounting of casts, both monthly and annually, to aid in evaporation losses and development of re- operational decisions and management of the gionalized curves or data for each hydrologic hydrologic resources of the Basin area. (d) expansion of the river and rainfall Recommendations 123 data network to more clearly define and (e) expansion of the storm surge pro- document the water resources of the Basin gram and to provide more definitive data for future (f) expansion of the VHF continuous studies weather broadcast program TABLE 2-9 Required Streamflow Data Collection Sites Stream Latitude Longitude OWDC Number a St. Louis River, Minn. 47021' 92036' 48078 Grand Calumet River at Nohman Avenue, Chicago, Ill. 41030' 87030' 48077 Wolf Lake at Chicago, Ill. 41039' 87032' 48070 Huron River at the mouth, Ohio 42005' 83011' 48076 Portage River at railroad bridge at Woodville, Ohio 41026'58" 83021'29" 48071 Grand River at Painsville, Ohio 41044'09" 83015'59" 48073 Ashtabula River at Ashtabula, Ohio 41054'00" 80047'44" 48072 West Twin River near Two Rivers, Wis. Tonawanda Creek near Millersport, N.Y. 43004' 78040' 48075 Pentwater River near Pentwater, Mich. Irondequoit Creek at Penfield,.N.Y. 43007' 77035' 48074 Pettibone Creek at Great Lake's Training Center, Ill. Big Cedar River near Cedar River, Mich. b Whitefish River near Rapid River, Mich. a Office of Water Data Collection, U.S. Department of the Interior. b Includes in previous list. SUMMARY Objectives Data Analysis The overall objective of this appendix is to Analyses of surface water data are grouped provide a generalized evaluation of surface into five sections for presentation in this ap- water runoff entering the five Great Lakes pendix: Runoff Analysis, Flood Characteris- from tributary streams in the United States. tics, Drought Flows, Surface Water Avail- Of the 298,000 square miles in the entire Great ability, and Reservoir Sites. The contents of Lakes Basin, approximately 115,000 square each section are discussed briefly in the fol- miles constitute the tributary area within the lowing paragraphs. United States and 88,000 square miles lie within the borders of Canada. An analysis of runoff potentials from tributary streams in Runoff Analysis Canada has not been made a part of this ap- pendix. The appendix has been developed only Average monthly runoff has been tabulated to the detail and scope required to determine for 143 stations in the Great Lakes Basin. In basic information for a comprehensive addition, a graph for one key station in each framework plan for management of water and planning subarea has been made, showing related land resources of the Great Lake Ba- with the average monthly runoff, the sin. Hydrologic determinations formulated in maximum and minimum runoff experienced this appendix were based on current informa- for each month during the period of record. tion already available for the Great Lakes Ba- sin. No new basic data were gathered for the appendix. Data concerning surface water Flood Characteristics generated in the Canadian portion of the Great Lakes Basin are available in publica- Statistical information has been tabulated tions by the Inland Waters Branch, Depart- from the annual peak discharge-frequency ment of Energy, Mines and Resources- curves of 187 stations. This information con- Surface Water Data, Ontario. sists of peak flow and maximum stage re- corded at each station along with the 2-year, 50-year, and 100-year frequency discharges Data Collection expected to occur at each station. A generalized peak frequency curve has been Within the United States portions of the provided for each planning subarea. This Great Lakes Basin the U.S. Geological Survey curve, by itself or in conjunction with one of is the prime agency responsible for gathering, the previously described curves, will enable a recording, and publishing of data on surface frequency curve to be estimated for any site water hydrology. The most complete source of within the Great Lakes Basin. Flood volume- published data is the Water Supply Papers of frequency curves were not computed as they the U.S. Geological Survey. The data are col- are beyond the scope of this report. lected and prepared for publication in cooper- ation with other Federal, State, local, and pri- vate agencies. To a more limited extent and for Drought Flows specific purposes, many other Federal, State, county, and municipal agencies plus public Low-flow statistical data are presented for and private corporations and individuals 154 stations. Data consist of the lowest instan- gather and record surface water data not pub- taneous, 1-day average and 7-day average lished in the Water Supply Papers. flows ever recorded at each of those stations. A 125 126 Appendix 2 probability analysis was made to determine Reservoir Sites the 1-day, 30-year, and 7-day, 10-year low flows that might be expected to occur at each sta- An attempt was made in this report to iden- tion. tify all existing and potential reservoir sites within the Great Lakes Basin. More than 2,500 sites were found and analyzed to determine Surface Water Availability capacity and surface area. However, because the smaller, low capacity sites would not have Cumulative mass curves have been drawn significant impact on framework-scope study for one key station in each of the 15 planning results, only 672 sites with more than 500 subareas and analyzed to develop generalized acres of available surface area were included storage-yield relationships. The latter curves in this section. Information on all sites is in- enable an estimate to be made of the storage cluded in working papers on file in the Great required to sustain a prescribed flow at a site Lakes Basin Commission office. within a given planning subarea. Flow storage statistical probability techniques are avail- able but were beyond the scope of this report. GLOSSARY acre-foot-a unit for measuring the volume of flow duration curve-a cumulative frequency water. It is equal to the quantity of water curve that shows the percentage of time required to cover one acre to a depth of one that specified discharges are equaled or ex- foot and is equal to 43,560 cubic feet or ceeded. 325,851 gallons. The term is commonly used in measuring volumes of water used or framework study (Great Lakes)-a broad- stored. gauged study for the development of the water and related land resources of the annual flood-the highest peak discharge in a Great Lakes Basin to make the best use of water year. such resources to meet the Basin's needs and make the greatest long-term contribu- average discharge-the arithmetic average of tion to the economic growth and social well- all complete water-years of record whether being of the people of the Basin and the na- or not they are consecutive. tion. consumptive use-the quantity of water dis- hydrologic area-an area delineated on the charged to the atmosphere or incorporated basis of a consistent relationship between in the products of the process in connection drainage areas and mean annual floods with vegetative growth, food processing, or among streams in that area. an industrial process. hydrologic gaging station-a particular site on cubic feet per second (cfs)-a unit expressing a stream, canal, lake, or reservoir where rates of discharge. One cubic foot per second systematic observations of gage height or is equal to the discharge of a stream of a discharge are obtained. rectangular cross section, 1 foot wide and I foot deep, flowing water an average velocity hydrologic gaging station number-assigned of 1 foot per second. location identifier employed by United States Geological Survey. cubic feet per second per day (cfs day)-the vol- ume of water represented by a flow of one hydrostatic pressure-pre s sure exerted by or cubic foot per second for 24 hours. It equals existing within a liquid at rest with respect 86,400 cubic feet, 1.983471 acre-feet, or to adjacent bodies. 646,317 gallons. infiltration-movement of water through the datum level-the zero with reference to which soil surface and into the soil. the altitudes of land surfaces and the depths of the sea are determined. interception-rainwater retained by leaves and stems of vegetation. drainage area-the drainage area of a stream at a specified location is that area, measured interpolate-to estimate intermediate values in a horizontal plane, which is enclosed by a of a function between two known points. drainage divide. interstices-the openings of pore spaces in a exceedence frequency-percentage of values rock. In an aquifer, they are filled with wa- that exceed a specified magnitude. ter. flood routing-the process of determining low-flow frequency curve-a graph showing progressively the timing and shape of a flood the magnitude and frequency of minimum wave at successive points along a river. flows for a period of given length. 127 128 Appendix 2 Pearson Type III function-family of asym- appears in surface streams. It is the same as metrical, unbounded, ideal frequency dis- streamflow unaffected by artificial diver- tributions, of which the normal distribution sions, storage, or other works of man in or on is a special case. the stream channels. percolation-the movement, under hydrostat- stage-the height of the water surface above ic pressure, of water through the interstices or below an established datum plane. Also a of a rock or soil. gage height. plan area (Great Lakes)-geographic areas transpiration-the process by which water drained by designated major tributaries or vapor escapes from the living plant, princi- groups of tributaries of the Great Lakes Ba- pally the leaves, and enters the atmosphere. sin. The plan areas of the Great Lakes Basin are: 1.0-Lake Superior; 2.0-Lake Michi- water year-the 12-month period, October 1 gan; 3.0-Lake Huron; 4.0-Lake Erie; through September 30. The water year is 5.0-Lake Ontario. designated by the calendar year in which it ends. runoff-that amount of the precipitation that LIST OF REFERENCES 1. American Geophysical Union, Transac- Civil Engineers Proceedings, Journal of tions, Vol. 40, pp. 879-881. Sanitary Engineering Division, Vol. 88, No. SA5, pp. 21-40, September 1962. 2. Beara, Leo R., Statistical Methods in Hydrology, U.S. Army Corps of En- 7. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil gineers, Sacramento District, Wash- Conservation Service, National En- ington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing gineering Handbook (NEH), Section 4, Office, January 1962. Hydrology, Washington, D.C., U.S. Gov- ernment Printing Office. 3. Cross, W.P., Low-Flow Frequency and Storage Requirement Indices for Ohio 8. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Streams, Bulletin 40, Columbus, Ohio, Conservation Service, Rainfall Fre- Ohio Department of Natural Resources, quency Atlas of the United States, Techni- 1965. cal Paper No. 40, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 4. Cross, W.P., Low-Flow Frequencies and Storage Requirements for Selected Ohio 9. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geologi- Streams, Bulletin 37, Columbus, Ohio, cal Survey, Magnitude and Frequency of Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Floods in the United States, Part 4, "St. 1963. Lawrence River Basin," Water Supply Paper 1677, Washington, D.C., U.S. Gov- 5. Cross, W.P. and Webber, E.W., Ohio ernment Printing Office. Streamflow Characteristics ! Part 2, "Supply and Storage Requirements," 10. U.S. Water Resources Council,A Uniform Bulletin 13, Columbus, Ohio, Ohio De- Technique for Determining Flood Flow partment of Natural Resources, 1950. Frequencies, Bulletin 15, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 6. Stall, John B., "Reservoir Mass Analysis December 1967. by Low Flow Series," American Society of 129 BIBLIOGRAPHY Brown, E.A. and Stuart, W.T., Groundwater Dawes, Julius H. and Terstriep, Michael, Po- Resources of the Glacial Deposits, Bessemer tential Surface Water Reservoirs of Illinois, Area, Michigan, Progress Report 14, Lansing, Springfield, Ill., Illinois State Water Survey, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1967. Geological Survey Division, June 1951. Doonan, C.J. and Hendrickson, G.E., Ground- Burgess and Niple, Limited, The Northwest water in Iron County, Michigan, Water Inves- Ohio Water Development Plan, Columbus, tigation 7, Lansing, Michigan Department of Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1967. Natural Resources, Geological Survey Divi- sion, 1967. Chow, Ven Te, Handbook of Applied Hydrol- ogy, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Erie-Niagara Basin Comprehensive Water 1964. Resources Planning Board, Erie-Niagara Basin Comprehensive Water Resources Plan, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and U.S. De- 1969. partment of the Interior, Geological Survey, Streamflow Characteristics, Low-Flow Fre- Federal Power Commission, Fox-Wolf River quencies, and Flow Duration, Bulletin 1, Har- Basin, Wisconsin, Planning Status Report, risburg, Pa., Department of Forests and Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Water Resources, 1966. Office, 1965. , Floods in Pennsyl- Hydroelectric Power vania, Frequency and Magnitude, Harrisburg, Resources of the United States, Developed and Pa., Department of Forests and Water Re- Undeveloped, Washington, D.C., U.S. Govern- sources,1960. ment Printing Office, January 1964. Cross, W.P., Floods of January-February 1959 , Menominee River in Ohio, Bulletin 35, Columbus, Ohio Depart- Basin Area, Planning Status Report, ment of Natural Resources, 1961. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1965. Cross, W.P. and Berlinagen, R.J., Ohio Streamflow Characteristics, Part 1, "Flow Du- St. Louis River Ba- ration," Bulletin 10, Columbus, Ohio Depart- sin, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Plan- ment of Natural Resources, 1949. ning Status Report, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1965. Cross, W.P. and Mayo, R.I., Floods in Ohio, A Supplement to Bulletin 32, Bulletin 43, Colum- Western Great Lakes bus, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Tributaries, Planning Status Report, 1969. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966. Cross, W.P. and Hedges, R.E., Flow Duration of Ohio Streams, Bulletin 31, Columbus, Ohio Frost, S.L. and Smith, R.C., Water Inventory of Department of Natural Resources, 1959. the Cuyahoga and Chagrin River Basins, Ohio, Columbus, Ohio Department of Natural Re- Cross, W.P. and Webber, E.W., Floods in Ohio, sources,1959. Magnitude and Frequency, Bulletin 32, Col- umbus, Ohio Department of Natural Re- Hendrickson, G.E., and Doonan, C.J., Ground- sources,1959. water Resources of Dickinson County, Michi- 131 132 Appendix 2 gan, Water Investigation 5, Lansing, Michi- Water Commission, gan Department of Natural Resources, The Northwest Ohio Water Development Plan, Geological Survey Division, 1966. Columbus, Ohio, January 1967. Krolczyk, J.D., Gazetteer of Ohio Streams, Co- , Water Inventory of lumbus, Ohio Department of Natural Re- the Mahoning and Grand RiverBasins andAd- sources, December 1960. jacent Areas in Ohio, Inventory Report 16, Columbus, Ohio, 1961. Illinois State Water Survey, Waterfor Illinois, A Plan for Action, Springfield, Ill., 1967. Water Inventory of the Maumee RiverBasin, Inventory Report 11, Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, Ohio, 1960. Little Calumet and Tributaries, Parts I, II, and Part 1, Appendix, Indianapolis, December Water Inventory of 1968. the Portage River and Sandusky River Basins and Adjacent Lake Erie Tributary Streams, Inter-agency Committee on Water Resources, Inventory Report 20, Columbus, Ohio, 1966. Subcommittee on Hydrology, Methods of Flow Frequency Analysis, Bulletin 13, Washington, Stanley Consultants, The Northeast Ohio D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966. Water Development Plan, Volume 1, Colum- bus, Ohio, Ohio Department of Natural Re- Michigan Department of Natural Resources, sources, 1969. Water Resources Commission, The Water Re- sources of the Upper Peninsula Drainage State of New York, Maximum Known Stages Area, Lansing, Mich., October, 1968. and Discharges ofNew York Streams, Bulletin 67, Albany, New York, 1967. The Water Resources of the Upper Peninsula Drainage Area, An Stuart, W. T., Brown, E. A., and Rhodehamel, Overview of Regional Water Uses, Lansing, E. C., Groundwater Investigations of the Mar- Mich., October, 1968. quette Iron Mining District, Technical Report 3, Lansing, Michigan Department of Natural Michigan Geological Survey, Water Resources Resources, Geological Survey Division, 1954. of the Marquette Iron Range Area, Water Sup- ply Paper 1842, Lansing, Michigan. Stuart, Wilbur, Theis, C.U., and Stanley, George M., Groundwater Problems of the Iron Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, River District, Technical Report 2, Lansing, Hydrologic Atlas of Minnesota, Bulletin 10, St. Mich., Michigan Department of Natural Re- Paul, Minn., April 1959. sources, Geological Survey Division, June 1948. The Lake Superior Watershed Unit, Bulletin 24, St. Paul, Minn., United Committee on Large Dams, Register of February 1966. Dams in the United States as of 1 January 1963. Power Development in Minnesota, Bulletin 20, St. Paul, Minn., July U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo Dis- 1962. trict, Genesee River Basin in Comprehensive Study of Water and Related Land Resources, The St. Louis River Appendix E, "Hydrology," Washington, D.C., Watershed Unit, Bulletin 22, St. Paul, Minn., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. November 1964. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Ohio River Di- New York Water Resources Commission, vision, Ohio River Basin Comprehensive Sur- Summary of Water Records at Principal Mea- vey, Vol. XII, Appendix K, Washington, D.C., surement Sites in the Genesee River Basin U.S. Government Printing Office, July 1968. through 1963, Bulletin 56, Albany, N.Y., 1965. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Upper Missis- Ohio Department of Natural Resources, sippi River Comprehensive Basin Study, Ap- Hydrologic Atlas, Columbus, 1960. pendix D, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969. Bibliography 133 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Central A Proposed Stream- Division, Water Levels of the Great Lakes, Re- flow Data Programfor New York, Washington, port on Lake Regulation, Appendix A, "Hy- D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. draulics and Hydrology," Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, December A Proposed Stream- 1965. flow Data Program for Ohio, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Compilation of Records of Surface A Proposed Stream- Waters of the United States through September flow Data Program for Pennsylvania, 1950, Part 4, "St. Lawrence River Basin, "Wa- Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing ter Supply Paper 1307, Washington, D.C., U.S. Office, 1970. Government Printing Office, 1958. , A Proposed Stream- Compilation of Rec- flow Data Program for Wisconsin, ords of Surface Waters of the United States, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing October 1950 through September 1960, Part 4, Office, 1970. "St. Lawrence River Basin," Water Supply Paper 1727, Washington, D.C., U.S. Govern- Reservoirs in the ment Printing Office, 1964. United States, Water Supply Paper No. 1838, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Flood of August 1942 Office, 1969. in the Ontonagon River Basin, Michigan, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Surface Water Sup- Office, October 1969. ply of the United States, Part 4, "St. Lawrence River Basin, 1960," Water Supply Paper 1707, Index of Surface Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Water Records to December 31, 1963, Part 4, Office, 1961. "St. Lawrence River Basin," Circular 507, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing U.S. Water Resources Council, The Nation's Office. Water Resources, Washington, D.C., U.S. Gov- ernment Printing Office, 1968. A Proposed Stream- flow Data Program for Illinois, Washington, Winslow, John D. et al, The Water Resources of D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Bulletin 26, Colum- bus, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, A Proposed Stream- 1953. flow Data Program for Indiana, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. Wolf River Basin Regional Planning Commis- sion, Wolf River Region Comprehensive Plan- A Proposed Stream- ning Report, 1966. flow Data Programfor Michigan, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. Youngquist, C.V., Water in Ohio, Summary and Prospects, Bulletin 20, Columbus, Ohio A Proposed Stream- Department of Natural Resources, 1949. flow Data Program for Minnesota, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. *Ar NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 3 6668 14110415 0 OOK NEW- 4W 71 W I 0@ 'M h c "M . .. .... . Al Ao 0 State of New York T- VM. t W & We4fook Department " ousing & Urban Development W 101 Department of the Interior 4 Department of J ce Department of S%t"e Department of Transportation Environmental Protection Agency Federal Power Commission Great Lakes Commission q 2i AWL.'