Identifying and preserving high-water mark data

Abstract

This series of manuals on Techniques and Methods (TM) describes approved scientific and datacollection procedures and standard methods for planning and executing studies and laboratory analyses. The material is grouped under major subject headings called "books" and further subdivided into sections and chapters. Section A of book 3 is on surface-water techniques. The unit of publication, the chapter, is limited to a narrow field of subject matter. These publications are subject to revision because of experience in use or because of advancement in knowledge, techniques, or equipment, and this format permits flexibility in revision and publication as the need arises. Chapter A24 of book 3 (TM 3-A24) deals with proper identification, evaluation, and temporary preservation of perishable high-water marks for data collection and use as discussed in many of the other chapters in this section. In addition, an appendix introduces the identification of persistent paleoflood evidence left by historical floods.

Paleohydraulic Reconstruction of Modern Large Floods at Subcritical Speed in a Confined Valley: Proof of Concept

“…No botanical evidence in Figure 6 could be correlated with the simulated profiles for 2000 ≤ Q ≤ 3000 m 3 ·s −1 . The absence of botanical marks for older, more severe floods corroborates their perishable nature [16].…”

“…• Botanical HWMs provide valuable data for understanding recent floods and reconstructing their spatial patterns but botanical PSIs are perishable, might be washed out by more extreme floods and need to be preserved, as recently pointed out by Koenig et al [16].…”

“…The reliability of PSIs for paleoflood studies is well established [14,15]. High-water marks (HWMs) [16] are the most useful source of information on establishing grade lines [14]. Non-systematic data can be combined with systematic data [9].…”

Preliminary peak stage and streamflow data for selected U.S. Geological Survey streamgaging stations in North and South Carolina for flooding following Hurricane Florence, September 2018

“…The stage data are collected using a variety of methods, including float, submersible pressure transducer, nonsubmersible pressure transducer, or noncontact radar. More information on how USGS streamgages operate is available in Lurry (2011). Although stage data are important, streamflow is often more important for such purposes as streamflow forecasting and flood warning, water-quality loading computations, flood-frequency analysis, and flood mitigation planning.…”

Evaluation of Hydrological and Hydraulic Models Applied in Typical Mediterranean Ungauged Watersheds Using Post-Flash-Flood Measurements

“…The flood depth in the stream bed, but also in various points within the Vatonias (Figure 9) and Stavros (Figure 10) floodplains, and the dimensions of the constructed works (bridges, culverts) that failed to channel the maximum water discharge were also measured. The field survey was organized according to United States Geological Survey (USGS) Techniques and Methods 3-A24 [55], with an emphasis on high water marks that included wash lines, lines of dried mud on surfaces, seed lines, and leaves or pine straw stuck in various places. Residents and local authorities who witnessed the flood events were interviewed and important information was obtained about the duration of the phenomena, the exact time that the flood occurred, and the exact location of several flooded houses and facilities.…”